
Qass_ 
Book- 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT 



y 







i 



A^' 



^^ 



f 




I 



THE 



TRIALS FOR TREASON 



AT 



I 



INDIANAPOLIS, 



DISCLOSING THE PLANS FOR ESTABLISHING 



North-Western Confederacy. 



; "jg th3 Official Record of the Trials before the Military Commission convened hy Special Orders No. 129, Head- 
Quarters District of Indiana ; Brevet Major General A. P. Hovet, Commander of the District. Brevet 
Brigadier General Silas Colgeove, President; H. L. Burnett, of the Department of 
the Ohio and Northern Department, Judge Advocate of the Commission. 
Containing the Testimony, Arguments, Finding and Sentence, in the case of Harrison H. Dodd ; also of William 
A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Heffeen, Lambdin P. Milligax, and Stephen Horsey. 
Developing the Origin, History, Extent, Names of Officers, etc., of the Secret Orders of 
Knights of the Golden Circle, the Circle of Honor, the Order of American 
Knights, and Order of the Sous of Liberty — their Organization, 
Rituals, Password.s, Grips, Oaths, Obligations and Pen- 
alties ; their ostensible and real purposes. 
With accurate Illustrations of the Greek Fire Shells, Hand Grenades, Kockets and Infernal Machines of the Con- 
spirators, introduced in Evidence on the Trials. 
To which is added the full Report of Judge Advocate General Holt on the Order of American Knights, alias th« 
Sous of Liberty ; a Western Conspiracy in aid of the Southern Rebellion. 



EDITED BY "^ 



BENN^-PITMAN, 

EECORDEK TO THE MILITARY COMMISSION. .,/ / 






^"■'l PUBLISHED BY 

""1 THE NEWS PUBLISHING COMPANY 

/ SALEM, INDIAN A. 






Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1865, 

By MOORE, WILSTACH & BALDWIN, 

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Soutliern District of Ohio. 



Record of assignment to 

E. B. STEPHENSON, Jb. 

Entered in the year 1S92, in conformity with tlie laws of the United States respecting copyrights. 

In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington, D. C. 




NTRODUCTORY. 




DOUBLE interest attaches itself to the records contained in the following 
pages : first, they contain the exposure of a plot to overthrow the 



National Government — a more perfidious, and, perhaps, more gigantic 
conspiracy than is found in the annals of any nation; and, secondly, the fact and 
incidents of its suppression by Martial law. 

The Northern sympathizers with the Southern Rebellion sought to give it aid, 
and insure its success, by designs both daring and malignant ; and with no other 
purpose than to perpetuate an institution at once a reproach and an outrage to 
civilization. These designs were checked, and a great calamity averted, by the 
strong arm of military power. The chief criminals were seized by military 
■authority, and tried and condemned by a military tribunal. 

For the first time in the history of the world, this mighty power, heretofore 
hut too frequently used by kings and despots for the purpose of aggression, or 
personal aggrandizement, has been exercised in a spirit of wise beneficence, to 
conserve the liberty of a great and free people. But, it is asked, is not this the 
attainment of a right by doing a great wrong? Such is the argument of the 
enemies of the Government. 

Has, then, the military power been unlawfully exercised? Has the supremacy 

of the Constitution been questioned, or have its wise provisions been ignored? 

Has Liberty — the priceless jewel for which the wisest and noblest have died — 

been confided to faithless hands? These are among the vital questions discussed 

and decided in the able arguments contained in this volume. 

Thanks to the institutions that have so ordained, and to the progress that has 

prepared us, the People are now the makers and directors of this potent, and 

3 



IV IXTKODUCTORT. 

necessarily despotic arm ! It is for the people, then, to determine -whether they 
or a faction shall rule; whether freedom shall continue to be the privileged 
birthright of our children, or whether an oligarchy shall plot to destroy this Great 
Republic, and erect a barbarism upon its ruins. These are questions upon which. 
every one desiring or deserving to live under the shield of a free and great 
nation, should satisfy himself; and he can not fail to be instructed, as well a-* 
deeply interested, in the developments contained in this volume. 






L^ 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 



PAGE. 

Explanation of Illustrations 7 

Illustrations 8 

Commission, Special Order for 9 

Jurisdiction of the Commission, Plea 

to the ■ 9 

Jurisdiction of the Commission, Argu- 
ments in support of the Plea 10 

Judge Advocate's Reply to Argument 

of Counsel '. 12 

Charges and Specifications preferred 

against H. H. Dodd 17 

Felix G. Stidger. Testimony of. 19 

George E. PcGH, " " 37 

Joseph KiRKPATRicK, " " 38 

William Clayton, " " 39 

"Wesley Tranter, " " 47 

Elliott Robertson, " " 49 

Affidavit of Counsel on the escape of 

H. H. DoDD 50 

Report of Colonel Warner on the escape 

of H. H. Dodd 50 

Argument of Judge Advocate, on pro- 
ceeding to findings and sentence in 

absence of the accused 50 

J. W. Gordon, Reply of 53 

*' " " Argument of, on the Ju- 
risdiction of the Commission 55 

M. M. Ray, Argument of. 64 

Judge Advocate, Reply of. 67 

Commission, Special Orders for 73 

Counsel, Introduction of 74 

Charges and Specifications preferred 
against William A. Bowles, Andrew 
Humphreys, Horace Heffren, L. P. 

Milligan, and Stephen Horsey 74 

Severance, Motions for 77 

J udge Advocate, Reply of on Severance. 78 

VVilliam M. Harrison, Testimony of.... 80 



Circular of the 0. S. L. to County 

Temples 83 

Letter of L. P. Milligan to General H. 

H. DoDD 88 

Edwin A. Davis, withdrawal of as Coun- 
sel 89 

Wesley Tranter, Testimony of 93 

Stephen Teney, " " 96 V 

Joseph J. Bingham, " " 97 

Felix G. Stidger, " " 106 

Thomas R. Cobb, Introduction of, as 

Counsel for Stephen Horsey 114 

Colonel A. J. Warner, Testimony of.... IIS 
C. L. V. (Vallandigham), Letter from... 119 

Elliott Robertson, Testimony of. 119 

Henry L. Zumro, " ".... 120 

Horace Heffren, Charges and Specifi- 
cations canceled 123 

Horace Heffren, Testimony of 123 

Cyrus L. Dunham, Counsel for Heffren, 

Statement of. 128 

Colonel J. T. Wilder, relieved 137 

James L. Mason, Testimony of 141 

Harrison Connell, " " 141 

Elisha Cowgill, " " 141 

James B. Wilson, " " 143 

William S. Bush, " " 150 

Speech of L. P. Milligan, Argument on 

admissibility of newspaper report of 151 
Speech of L. P. Milligan, loyal or dis- 
loyal character of. 153 

Nicholas Cochrane, Testimony of. 156 

Testimony on the part of the Govern- 
ment closed 157 

William G. Moss, Testimony of 157 

Argument on the admissibility of state- 
ments made by the accused in his 

own favor 157 

5 



VI 



TABLE OF CONTEXTS. 



Character for loyalty, etc., of A. Hum- 
phreys 163 

D. O. Dailey, Testimony of 165 

Rev. Richard A. Currem, Testimony of 166 
Argument on admissibility of state- 
ments not expressed to any public 

assembly 166 

John J. Scotton, Testimony of. 169 

William Sayler, " " 169 

George Bailey, " " 169 

William Allen, " " 169 

William Wolf, " " 170 

W. M. SWASEY, " " 170 

Geo. Bailey (recalled) " " 170 

William WixEs, " " 171 

William Johnson, " " 171 

William C. Kocher, " " 172 

Joseph Johnson, " " 172 

Samuel Winters, " " 173 

G. R. CoRLEW, " " 176 

Samuel F. Day, " " 177 

OcH^UG Bird, " " 177 

B. F. Ibach, " " 179 

Captain Samuel Place," " 180 

G. R. CoRLEw (recalled)" " 180 

Moses W. MiLLiGAN, " " 180 

Edward Price, " " ISO 

S. G. Burton, " " 181 

Speech of A. Humphreys, Argument on 
the admissibility of what he said as 

to right of secession, etc 181 

Willis G. Neff, Testimony of. 185 

John Roach, " " 186 

Wilson B. LocKRiDGE, " " 186 

Samuel McGaughey, " " 187 

Cutter S. Dobbins, " " 187 

Harrison Connell, " " 187 

William N. Ranney, " " 187 

Gen. Alvin P. Hovey, " " 188 

M. B. Brant, " " 188 

W. J. Smith, " " 18^ 

Samuel Chandler, " " 189 

D. Garland Rose, " " 189 

Edward Harrison, '' " 189 

John Nave, " " 189 

\V. C. Smock, " " 189 

David Stockman, " " 189 



PA OH. 

Jacob Farlixg, Testimony of. 189 

Wm. R. Taylor, " " 190 

R. C. Booking, " •' 190 

Wm. H. Chapman, " " 191 

William Johnson, " •' 191 

Samuel D. Price, " " 191 

Thurston W. Bitting, " " 191 

BORZILLAI MeSSLER, " '' 191 

Thomas G. Smith, " " 192 

Mrs. Elizabeth T. Simons, Testimony of 192 
Impeaching of the Testimony of Rich- 
ard A. Curren, Argument on 192 

Jonathan W. Gordon, Argument of 195 

M. M. Ray, " " 224 

J. R. Coffroth, " " 23S 

Judge Advocate Burnett, Reply of 249 

Explanation of Initials employed in the 

Rituals 295 

Knights of the Golden Circle, Ritual of 297 

Sons of Liberty, First Degree (I) 299 

Sons of Liberty, Vestibule Lesson, (S. L. ) 3u2 
Sons of Liberty, First Degree (0. S. L.) 30a 
Sons of Liberty, First Conclave or Sec- 
ond Degree (I) 306 

Sons of Liberty, Second Conclave or 

Third Degree (II) .' 308 

General Laws of the Order of Sons of 

Liberty 30S 

Constitution of the Grand Council of 

S. L. of Indiana 311 

Constitution and Laws of the Supreme 

Grand Council 314 

Proceedings of the Grand Council State 

of Indiana 315 

Address of the Grand Commander State 

of Indiana 316 

Resolutions of the Grand Council State 

of Indiana 319 

Report of the Grand Secretary State of 

Indiana 319 

Holt, Judge Advocate General, Official 

Report of 323 

Letter from General Heintzelman to 

Major General Halleck 339 

H. H. DoDD, Letter of, to the Cincinnati 

Enquirer 340 



EXPLANATION OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS. 



No. 1 is a seemingly harmless portmanteau. 

No. 2 exhibits its internal arrangement. An 
alarm-clock, with the bell removed, set to any 
given time, springs the lock of a gun, the 
hammer of which, striking and exploding a 
cap, placed upon a tube filled with powder, 
fires a train connected with a bottle of Greek 
fire. The explosion of these combustibles ig- 
nites the tow, saturated with turpentine, with 
which the remainder of the portmanteau is 
filled. 

No. 3 is a conical shell, three and a half 
inches in diameter. 

Nos. 4 and 5 exhibit the same unscrewed. 

No. 7 is a case to contain powder, with a 
nipple for a cap at its upper end. No. 7 screws 
into 6, the space between the two being filled 
with Greek fire. Nos. 6 and 7 make an inte- 
rior shell, fitting loosely in No. 3, and which, on 
striking any object, explodes the cap on the 
top of 7. 

No. 8 is a spherical shell, or hand-grenade. 

Nos. 9 and 10 exhibit the same unscrewed. 

No. 11 is an interior shell, with nine nip- 
ples for caps, fitting loosely so as to leave 



space for concussion. No. 11, also, is made to 
unscrewjn the center, to hold No. 12, a small 
vial containing Greek fire — the space between 
the two being filled with powder. The drop- 
ping of this shell a quarter of a yard from 
the floor, invariably explodes one or more of 
the caps. The string attached to No. 8 ena- 
bles a person to throw it a greater distance, 
as a sling, with less danger of explosion in 
his own hand. 

No. 13 is a letter in secret cipher, sometimes 
employed by the Order of Sons of Liberty in 
their communication with each other, upon 
matters requiring secrecy. 

" Headquarters, 10th District, \ 
Grand Marshal's Office. / 
" Dept. Marshal: 

"We have 40 rifles and 100 pistols for your 
township. It is necessary that they are placed 
in the hands of our brothers immediately. 
Inform your company that the arms will be 
ready on Wednesday night. 

"Yours, 

"A. A. D. C. 

lip Yfj' 

7 



APPROVAL OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR, ETC. 



Cincinnati, O., Nov. 7, 18C4. 
Major H. L. Burnett^ Judge Advocate Depart- 
ment of the Ohio and Northern Department : 
Messrs. Moore, "Wilstach & Baldwin, of this 
city, will publish in permanent and respec- 
lable book shape, and I will edit, the official 
reports of the trial of H. H. Dodd, also of 
W. A. Bowles, and others, adding thereto 
the report of the Judge Advocate General, 
if I can obtain your sanction and co-opera- 
tion, and the approval of the Military au- 
thorities. 

I am, very respectfully and obediently, 
(Signed) BENN PITMAN," 

Recorder to the Militarif Commission. 



[KDORSEMEXT OF H. L. BURNETT, JUDGE ADVO- 
CATE DEPARTMENT OF THE OHIO AND NORTHERN 
DEPARTMENT. 

Judge Advocate's Office, 
Department of the Ohio and Northern Dejiartment, 
Cincinnati, C, Nov. 7, 1SG4. 

Respectfully referred to Brigadier Gen- 
eral J. Holt, Judge Advocate General, U. 
S. Army. 

The within application of Mr. Pitman re- 
ceives my approval, and, in the enterprise 
which he proposes to undertake, I will give 
him such assistance as I am, from time to 
time, able to render. I think the publica- 
tion of these treason trials will be of great 



public service in showing the people the 
contemplated anarchy and bloodshed from 
which they have been delivered, and, as a 
result, confirming them in their patriotic 
resolves to support the Government in its 
efforts to maintain law, order and civiliza- 
tion. It will tend to unite the Northern 
people more completely in their support of 
the Government in its efforts to maintain the 
integrity of the Republic as the only means 
of establishing a permanent peace. 
(Signed) H. L. BURNETT, 

Judge Advocate Department of the Ohio 
And Northern Department. 



INDORSEMENT OF BRIGADIER GENERAL J. HOLT, 
JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL. 
Bureau or Militart Justice, Nov. II, 1804. 



Approved. 
(Signed) 



J. HOLT, 
Judge Advocate General. 



INDORSEMENT OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF WAR, 
C. A. DANA. 
War Department, Nov. 15, 1364. 

Approved. 

By order of the Secretary of War. 

(Signed) C. A. DANA, 

Assistant Secretary of War. 



PROCEEDINGS 



MILITARY COMMISSION, 



Which convened at Indianapolis, Indiana, by virtue of the following Special Orders, 

to wit : 



..} 



Headquahters District of Indiana, 

Indianapolis, September 17, 1864. 

Special Orders No. 129. 

A Military Commission is constituted to 
meet at the United States Court Rooms, in 
the city of Indianapolis, on the nineteenth 
(19th) day of September, 1864, at 10 o'clock, 
A. M., or as soon tliereafter as practicable, 
for the trial of Harrison H. Dodd, and such 
other prisoners as may be brought before it. 

DETAIL FOR THE COMMISSION. 

1. Brevet Brigadier General Silas Col- 
grove, United States Volunteers. 

2. Colonel William E. McLean, 43d In- 
fantrv, Indiana Volunteers. 

3. Colonel John T. Wilder, 17th Infantry, 
Indiana Volunteers. 

4. Colonel Thomas I. Lucas, 16th In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

5. Colonel Charles D. Murray, 89th In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

6. Colonel Benjamin Spooner, 83d In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

7. Colonel Richard P. DeHart, 128th In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

Major Henry L. Burnett, Judge Advocate 
Department of the Ohio and Northern 
Department, Judge Advocate. 

The Commission will sit without regard 
to hours. 

By order of Brevet Major General Alvin 
P. Hovey. AND. C. KEMPER, 

Assistant Adjutant General. 

Headqtjaeters DisTKirT OF Indiana, \ 
Indianapolis, September 21, 1804. j 

Special Orders No. 131. 

2. Colonel Ambrose A. Stevens, Veteran 
Reserve Corps, is appointed a member of 
the Military Commission, constituted by 
Special Order No. 129, of the 17th of Sep- 
tember, instant, from these Headquarters. 

By order of Brevet Major General Alvin 
P. Hovey. 

[Signed] AND. C. KEMPER, 

Assistant Adjvtant General. 



CorRT KOOM, iNDtANAPOUS, INDIANA, 

September 22, 1804: 10 o'clock, a. M 



.} 



The Commission met pursuant to the 
foregoing orders. 

All the members present.* Also, the 
Judge Advocate. 

The Commission then proceeded to the 
trial of Harrison H. Dodd, a citizen of In- 
diana, who was present before the Commis- 
sion, and who, having heard read the order 
appointing the Commission, also the order 
detailing Colonel Ambrose A. Stevens as a 
member, was asked by the Judge Advocate 
if he had any objection to any member 
named in the orders, to which he replied, 
" I have none." 

The members of the Commission and the 
Judge Advocate were then duly sworn in 
the presence of the accused. 

Benn Pitman and W. S. Bush were duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, as Recorders 
to the Commission, also in the presence of 
the accused. 

The accused applied to the Commission 
to be jjermitted to introduce J. W. Gordon, 
Esq., and M. M. Ray, Esq., as his counsel, 
which application was granted, and they 
appeared as counsel for the accused. 

The accused, through his counsel, then 
offered the following plea to the jurisdiction 
of the Commission: 

The defendant, Harrison H. Dodd, pro- 
tests and objects to the jurisdiction of the 
Commission appointed to try him upon the 
aforesaid charges and specifications there- 
under, and claims the right, as a citizen of 
the LTnited States, and of the State of In- 
diana, to have the said charges and specifi- 
cations presented by a grand jury of the 



'■' If a member of the Commission w.'\s, in any case, 
absent from sickness, or other unavoidable cause, th« 
case was proceeded with, on the cousenl of the accused 
being given in open Court, and such member took his 
seat again on the Commission only with the consent of 
the accused being given in open Court, after having first 
heard read all the testimony taken during his absence. 



10 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



district wherein said several oftenses are 
alleged to have been committed, to the 
proper District Court thereof; and to be 
tried by a jury of the said district, duly- 
elected and sworn according to the Consti- 
tution and laws of the United States of 
America. This he claims as a citizen of the 
United States, and of the State and District 
of Indiana, and as being in no wise con- 
nected with the army or navy of the United 
States, as a member thereof, or as attached 
thereto. 
• Respectfully submitted, 

HAERISON H. DODD. 
The Commission adjourned, to meet on 
Friday, September 23, at 10 o'clock, A. M. 

Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
September 23, 1864, 10 o'clock, A. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused, and his coun- 
sel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

The accused, through his counsel, sub- 
mitted the following brief in support of his 
plea to the jurisdiction of the Commission: 

Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission: 

In support of his objection to the juris- 
diction of the Commission to try him upon 
the charges preferred against him, the de- 
fendant respectfully submits the following 
considerations: 

I. These charges involve capital and infa- 
mous crimes, and the Constitution of the 
United States expressly provides that "no 
person shall be held to answer for a capital 
or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a 
presentment or indictment by a grand jury, 
except in cases arising in the land or naval 
forces, or in the militia, when in actual 
service in time of war or public danger." 
{Amend. Coiist. Art. 5.) And again: "In all 
criminal cases the prisoner sliall enjoy the 
right of a speedy and public trial, by an im- 
partial jury of the State and district where 
the crime shall have been committed," etc. 
{Amend. Const. Art. 6.) 

These provisions were adopted after tlie 
organization of the Government of the 
United States under the Constitution, and 
for the purpose of placing the trial by jury 
entirely beyond the power of Congress, and 
of all other branches of the Government. 
The Constitution, as originally adopted, 
contained the following provision on the 
subject: "The trial of all crimes, except in 
cases of impeachments, shall be by jury; 
and such trial shall be held in the State 
where such crime shall have been commit- 
ted." {Article 4, section 2.) So jealous were 
the peojjle of the right in question, that 
they required the amendment quoted, not- 
withstanding the original provision. 

The defendant is a citizen of the United 



States, and of the State of Indiana, not in 
the land or naval forces, or in the militia 
in actual service. He is, therefore, not 
within the exception of Article 5 of amend- 
ments above cited. That exception does 
not affect his right any more than if it did 
not exist. These several provisions of the 
Constitution are absolute as to him; and if 
any constitutional provision can protect a 
right, it would seem that he ought to be 
protected from a trial not in conformity 
with them. It seems that he can not, in 
fairness, be tried without first being pre- 
sented by a grand jury; or tried without a 
petit jury of the district wherein his al- 
leged oftenses were committed. 

II. But it may be said that we are in a state 
of war; that the writ of habeas corpus is sus- 
pended; and the provisions in question are 
under similar suspension. But there is no 
provision for the suspension of any branch 
of the Constitution. The Constitution, in- 
deed, authorizes the suspension of the ha- 
beas corpus act — a law of the land, generally 
adopted in the States prior to the adoption 
of the Constitution. The right of trial by 
jury, however, is placed on a difterent and 
higher ground. It is secured by these sev- 
eral absolute provisions of the Constitution, 
against all chances, and under all circum- 
stances. The fiat that suspends it must be 
potent enough to abolish every principle of 
tlie Constitution, and all those primordial 
riglits that existed before the Constitution, 
and so far as human foresight could provide 
against their invasion, protected by plain 
constitutional provisions. 

If it should be contended, then, that the 
power necessary for the suspension of the 
habeas corpus involves in its exercise the sus- 
pension of the right of trial by jury, he 
begs leave to say that, in his opinion, it can 
not for the following reasons: 

1. The trial by jury is placed by the Con- 
stitution among the original reserved rights 
of the people, and must, in favor of natural 
liberty, be held safe as against the exercise 
of any doubtful power, upon the principle 
of construction applied to constitutions, 
that grants of power are to be construed 
strictly as against the power, and in favor 
of liberty. 

2. But, being last in point of time, and 
of equal authority with the provision in re- 
lation to the suspensions of habeas corpus, 
the amendments must be held to restrain 
that provision so far as may be necessary to 
the perfect enjoyment of the rights asserted 
in the amendments. 

3. Simply, however, because they are 
amendments to the Constitution, every 
thing contained in that instrument that 
may, in any view, be held to impair rights 
therein asserted, must give way to them. 
To that extent they change and modify the 
powers conferred on the Government, in 
the original instrument. The right of trial 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



11 



by jury in the cases referred to, can not be 
impaired, much less taken away, by a sus- 
pension of the habeas corpus, nor, indeed, by 
any order of the Executive, or law of Con- 
gress. To this effect see 2d Story on Const, 
section 1778 to 1795, inclusive. 

III. But not only may this right of trial 
by jury be regarded as affirmatively assert- 
ed, and secured to the citizen, by the pro- 
visions of the Constitution, but any and 
every other mode of trial must be taken 
to be excluded and prohibited. Thus: "No 
person shall be held to answer for any cap- 
ital or otherwise infamous crime, unless in 
case of presentment and indictment by 
grand jury," etc., clearly precludes the no- 
tion of any other form of trial. The old 
common law, and great statutes of England, 
brought over with them by the founders of 
the English colonies, and in force at the 
time of the adoption of the Constitution of 
the United States, excluded all other modes 
of trial of any citizen, not in the military 
service, and expressly that by military com- 
mission. Mr. Justice Story, as already cited, 
expressly appeals to and quotes Magna 
Charta upon this point, and in support of 
this position. The 39th chapter of that 
great act is as follows: "No freeman shall 
be taken or imprisoned, or disseized, or 
outlawed, or banished, or in any way de- 
stroyed; nor will we pass upon him, unless 
by the lawful judgment of his peers, or by 
the law of the land." "The judgment of 
his peers, here alluded to," says Story, "is 
the trial by jury, who are called the peers 
of the party accused, being of the like con- 
dition, and equal." He also expressly says: 
" When our more immediate ancestors re- 
moved to America, they brought this great 
privilege with them, as their birthright and 
inheritance, as a part of that admirable 
common law, which had fenced round and 
interposed barriers on every side against 
the approaches of arbitrary power." {Sec- 
tion 1779.) But this denial of any other 
form of trial, and especially that by mili- 
tary commission, was asserted in the " Pe- 
tition of Eight," passed in the third year of 
Charles I. It is therein enacted and estab- 
lished, " that no man, of what estate or con- 
dition that he be, should be put out of his 
land or tenement, nor taken, nor imprisoned, 
nor disherited, nor put to death, without 
due process of law;" and in speaking of the 
commissions aforesaid, the act employs the 
following terms: "Which commissions, and 
all others of like nature, are wholly and 
directly contrary to the said laws and stat- 
utes of the realm." Similar language was 
employed in the Bill of Rights, passed at 
the time of the revolution of 1688, and it 
may safely be stated that since that time 
no proceeding of this nature has taken 
place in England, against any person not a 
member of the army or navy, or in the mili- 
tia in actual service. Indeed, a distinguished 



English Judge has said that " martial 
law, as of old, does not exist in England at 
all," and is contrary to the Constitution, 
and has been for a century exploded. 
{Grant vs. Gouid, 2 H. BL, 69; 1 Hale P. C, 
364; Hale Com. Law C, 2, 36.) This, it has 
been remarked by a learned Judge, "is cor- 
rect as to the community, both in war and 
peace." 

IV. By an act of Congress, approved July 
31; 1864 ( Vol. 12, Statutes at large, p. 2184), con- 
spiracies are defined, and the mode of pun- 
ishment prescribed, namely, by trial in the 
Circuit or District Courts of the United 
States, of the proper circuit or district. Can 
these parties be tried before any other tri- 
bunal? The defendant holds not. By the 
President's proclamation of September 24, 
1862, suspending the privilege of the writ 
of habeas corpus, it was ordered, " That dui'- 
ing the existing insurrection, and as a 
necessary measure for suppressing the same, 
all rebels and insurgents, their aiders and 
abettors, within the United States, shall be 
subject to martial law, and liable to trial 
and punisliment by court-martial or mili- 
tary commission." Without stopping to 
inquire whether this proclamation was au- 
thorized, and if so, whether it embraced 
persons charged with committing a substan- 
tive offense, within a State not in insurrec- 
tion, and where the United States Courts 
were in the full exercise of their powers, 
the defendant claims that it has been su- 
perseded by the act of Congress of the 3d 
of March, 1863 ( Vol. 12, Statutes at large, 755), 
relating to the writ of habeas corpus, and the 
President's proclamation based thereon, of 
September 15, 1863. The first section of 
the act of 1863, authorizes the President to 
suspend the writ of habeas corpus. The sec- 
ond requires the Secretaries of State and 
War to report to the Judges of the United 
States Circuit and District Courts the names 
of all persons held in military custody, by 
order of the President, in their respective 
districts, and if the grand juries of the 
proper districts fail to find bills, it is made 
the duty of the Judges to have all such 
persons discharged on taking the oath of 
allegiance and giving bond, if required. The 
third section pi'ovides that all persons so 
held and not reported, shall be entitled to 
a discharge in the same manner as is 
provided in the second section, after a fail- 
ure on the part of the proper grand jury to 
indict them. Here are all the sections of 
this act which bear on the question, and it 
will be seen that while they contemplate 
and sanction military arrests, they do not 
countenance or authorize military trials. 
On the contrary, they fairly discountenance 
them. 

The President's proclamation, based on 
this act, limits the suspension of habeas cor- 
pus to persons amenable to military law, or 
to the rules and articles of war. No order 



12 



TREASON TRIALS AT IXDIAXAPOLIS. 



is contained in the proclamation in regard 
to trial, and the inference is irresistible that 
the proper courts are left to act under the 
rules of law u^Don that subject, and these 
are too well defined to require comment. 
Civil courts try offenses against the law 
committed by citizens — military courts and 
commissions try such as are subject to 
the rules and articles of war, and the de- 
fendant claims that he does not fall within 
that class. 

V. The recent act, giving military courts 
jurisdiction of offenses against the civil 
laws when committed by soldiers, excludes 
citizens, by its silence, from any such pro- 
vision, and leaves them to be tried by the 
civil courts, for all sucli offenses. {Revised 
Reg., 1863, ;x 544.) 

VI. The defendant further desires the 
Commission to consider this question, in 
determining that of jurisdiction, namely: 
Can the sentence of the Commission be 
pleaded in bar to a prosecution upon in- 
dictment for the offenses charged in the 
civil courts? It would seem not, in view of 
tlie recent legislation of Congress already 
cited. That legislation clearly gives tlie 
Jurisdiction of tlie case to the civil courts, 
and upon the failure to try or convict him, 
entitles him to be discharged, either upon 
terms, or absolutely. 

In view of these considerations, the de- 
fendant respectfully submits that he is not 
triable by this Commission, not being within 
tlie jurisdiction thereof, or of any other 
military tribunal whatever. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 
HARRISON H. DODD. 

JUDGE advocate's ANSWER. 

The Judge Advocate, Major Burnett, then 
made the following rejily : 

To support the jurisdiction of the Com- 
mission appointed to try this case, 1 submit: 

1. The proclamation of the President of 
the United States, published in Genei-al 
Orders No. 141, dated September 25, 1862. 

2. Tlie general principles of the laws of 
nations, and the laws and customs of war — 
the military lex non scripta of ev6ry land. 

The proclamation of the President is as 
follows : 

War Depaktmf.nt, Adjutant General's Office, \ 
Washington, September 25, 1804. j 

General Orders No. 141. 

The following proclamation by the Presi- 
dent is published for the information and 
government of the army, and all concerned: 

BY THE PRF.SIDF.NT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA — 
A PROCLAMATION. 

"Whereas, It has become necessary to call 
into service not only volunteers, but also 
portions of the militia of tlie States by draft, 
in order to suppress the insurrection exist- 
ing in tlie United States, and disloyal per- 
sons are not adequately restrained by the 



ordinary process of law from hindering this 
measure, and from giving aid and comfort 
in various ways to the insurrection; now, 
therefore, be it ordered, 

First. That during the existing insurrec- 
tion, and as a necessary measure for sup- 
pressing the same, all rebels and insurgents, 
their aiders and abettors, within the United 
States, and all persons discouraging volun- 
teer enlistments, resisting militia drafts, or 
guilty of any disloyal practice, affording aid 
and comfort to rebels against the authority 
of the United States, shall be subject to 
martial-law, and liable to trial and punish- 
ment by courts-martial or military commis- 
sion. 

Second. That the writ of habeas corpus is 
suspended in respect to all persons arrested, 
or who are now or hereafter during the re- 
bellion shall be imprisoned in any fort, 
camp, arsenal, military prison or other place 
of confinement, by any military authority, 
or by the sentence of any court-martial or 
military commission. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set 
my hand, and caused the seal of the United 
States to be affixed. 

Done at the city of Washington, this, 
twenty-fourth day of September, in the year 
of our Lord one thousand eight hundred 
and sixty-two, and of the independence of 
the United States the eighty-seventh. 

ABRAHAM LINCOLN. 

By the President : 

William H. Seward, Secretary of State. 

By order of the Secretary of War : 

L. Thomas, Adjutant General. 

In determining the action of the Com- 
mission, this is sufficient, but in support of 
the position held, I submit: 

That it is an admitted principle in ethics, 
that self-preservation is the first law of na- 
ture; that self-preservation, or self-defense, 
is the right of every unity or community. 
This nation is engaged in suppressing a 
gigantic rebellion, to which end it has 
brought into the field a vast army. Every 
fiber of this great nation is quivering in its 
effort to sustain this army in its present vast 
proportions. That army being organized 
and put into the field, becomes a living, 
sentient, and, to a certain extent, independ- 
ent body. A blow is sought to be struck at 
that body — at that great army of the Re- 
I)ublic — to sever it, and render it power- 
less — a blow all the more mischievous and 
malignant, because it is covert and con- 
cealed. To preserve itself, to maintain its 
integrity when it finds itself thus secretly 
attacked, it docs not wholly fall back on 
its Government to protect it, but it protects 
itself by seizing the antagonistic force. It 
is one of the innate principles of every ex- 
isting thing, that it is endowed with the 
right to meet and overcome the force that 
seeks to destroy it. Here, then, is a power 
being organized — it is true, in a loyal State, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



13 



but with the purpose of moving into a semi- 
disloyal State, a portion of which is occu- 
pied and held by forces seeking to destroy 
this army, and with the intent to co-operate 
with those forces to render powerless our 
army, and, if possible, to destroy it and the 
Government. This army, therefore, with- 
out waiting for its Government to move, 
through the slow machinery of civil law, 
against this military force that is being ar- 
rayed against it, seizes it, and says to it, 
" You are not meeting us in open battle, 
but you steal upon vis in the night time, and 
attempt, assassin-like, to stab us in the back 
while we are facing the common enemy in 
the front. You are not fighting us accord- 
ing to the recognized military law of na- 
tions, but by the secret arts of the assassin. 
We. therefore, wheel upon you, and grapple 
you, from an instinct of self-preservation." 

It is as though a stealthy foe should creep 
into a camp or garrison at night, and seek 
to ignite the magazine, and destroy the lives 
of the entire garrison. If caught, would 
that garrison hesitate to convene a court, 
and try the offender as a secret, military 
assassin ? In like manner, when foes, cun- 
ningly avoiding all show of open hostility, 
secretly arm themselves, not as enemies 
particularlj' of the Genei-al Government, 
but as enemies of the military power of the 
Government, the military laws of the land 
give power to seize the persons of these 
secret foes, and hold them responsible for 
their acts to the common law military. 

Take the case in hand, as it is claimed to 
be, that there was an organized, formidable 
conspiracy, military in its character, and 
created and held in existence for the puv- 
pose of aiding the enemies of the. country 
and destroying the armies of the nation, 
numbering in the States of Ohio, Indiana 
and Illinois, as claimed by its leaders, one 
hundred thousand men, the avowed pur- 
pose of these conspirators being to release 
the rebel i^risoners held in those States, 
numbering between forty and fifty thousand 
veteran soldiers, arm them with guns to be 
seized from the arsenals of these States, and 
then to move into Kentucky, seizing all the 
large cities by the way, take possession of 
the Louisville and Nashville road, and, in- 
trenching at Nashville or Chattanooga, cut 
GeneralSherman's communications, thereby 
placing him between two large armies, sev- 
ering him from his base of supplies, and 
thus eftectually, as they thought, destroying 
this great South-western wing of our army — 
this right arm of the Eepublic — thereby 
giving to the rebels the power to dictate to 
the United States terms of peace and sepa- 
ration. It was a far-reaching, villainous 
scheme, and had in it many of the elements 
of success. The Government stood on the 
brink of a precipice. But the conspirators 
were foiled by the military power of the 
Government. Will it be said that when the 



military authorities discovered this plot, 
they should have waited for affidavits, for 
an arrest and hearing before a United States 
Commissioner, and then have released these 
conspirators upon bail, permitting them to 
again take the lead of their hosts to work 
out their schemes of treason against the 
Government? Such a course might have 
involved the destruction of the nation. 
Self-preservation demanded that these men 
should be seized by the military power. 
Foreseeing this danger, martial law had 
been declared by the President, and mili- 
tary courts given jurisdiction. 

In support of tire powers of the Govern- 
ment, in cases of insurrection, or in case of 
great public danger, to suspend the opera- 
^tions of the civil law, I cite the opinion of 
Chief Justice Taney, in a case before the 
Supreme Court, where the Government of 
the State had declared martial law in Rhode 
Island. In rendering an opinion on that 
case, he says: "Unquestionably a State may 
use its military power to put down an insur- 
rection too strong to be controlled by the 
civil authority. The power is essential to 
the existence of every government — essen- 
tial to the i^reservation of order and free 
institutions, and is as necessary to the States 
of this Union as to any other government. 
* * * Without power to do this," he 
again says, "martial law and the military 
array of the Government would bo mere 
parade, and rather encourage attack than 
repel it." 

Justice Woodbury, dissenting, said that 
"a State could not declare martial law, inas- 
much as the war power, of which it forms a 
part, was lodged exclusively in the General 
Government." Certainly no one will deny 
that if the Government of a State can de- 
clare martial law for suppressing an insur- 
rection within thatState, with much stronger 
reason can the General Government, when 
an insurrection exists against it, declare and 
enforce martial law, either in part or in 
whole. 

The main question raised by the defense 
in their argument, is, whether the legisla- 
tive branch of this Government, or the 
President, has the power of suspending the 
writ of habeas corpus, and declaring martial 
law throughout the land. In reply to the 
argument of the counsel for the accused, I 
propose to cite a few quotations applicable 
to this case: 

Martial law is the suspension, for the time 
being, of all constitutions and civil laws, 
the closing of common law courts, and the 
forcible inauguration of a new, temporary, 
arbitrary systein of administering justice; 
and is only to be justified by the over- 
whelming necessities of the case. 

I propose, first, to examine English author- 
ities upon this subject; and tlien refer to 
American jurisi^rudence as to the right to 
proclaim martial law. 



14 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



It may be premised that martial law in 
England as completely violates and sus- 
pends the Magna Charta as in this country 
it does our own Constitution. 

Section 39 provides: "No freeman shall 
be taken or imprisoned, or disseized, or out^ 
lawed, or banished, or in any way destroyed; 
nor will we pass upon him, unless by the 
lawftll judgment of his peers, or by the law 
of the land." 

The Mutiny Act of 1689, which has been 
re-enacted at every session of Parliament 
for more than one hundred and seventy 
years, contains the following declaration: 

"Whereas, no man may be forejudged of 
life or limb, or subjected to any kind of 
judgment by martial law, or in any other 
manner than by the judgment of his peers, 
and according to the known and established 
laws of this realm," etc. 

It is impossible to conceive of any doc- 
trine more irradically graven upon the Con- 
stitution and civil polity of England, than 
this right of habeas corpus^ and exemption 
of the subject from the operation of mar- 
tial law. But notwithstanding this clear 
provision of the Magna Charta, as often as 
it is necessary, martial law is proclaimed. 
In the riots of 1780, after the mob had in- 
sulted a majority of Parliament, and the 
residence of the Chief Justice, the King in 
council issued his proclamation : 

'' We have, therefore, issued the most di- 
rect and efl'ectual orders to all our officers, 
by an immediate exertion of their utmost 
force, to suppress the same." 

After which the Adjutant General issued 
orders to the army as follows : 

"In obedience to an order of the King in 
council, the military are to act without 
awaiting the direction of the civil magis- 
trate, and to use force for dispersing the 
illegal and tumultuous assemblies of the 
people." 

In subsequent debates in Parliament, the 
conduct of the King was approved. Lord 
Mansfield and Lord Thurlow claimed that it 
was not a prerogative of the King to de- 
clare martial law, or to use the military to 
suppress riots ; but they defended the act 
on the ground of necessity. 

During the Irish rebellion in 1798, Lord 
Camden, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, pro- 
claimed martial law, which existed a year 
without any legislative action, and after 
that the Irish Parliament sanctioned the 
act. In 1801, after the union, this subject 
was discussed, and a bill was introduced to 
continue martial law in Ireland. In this 
debate, both those who approved, and those 
who opposed the bill, conceded the right of 
the Executive Government to proclaim 
martial law when necessary. 

Sheridan, opposing the bill, said: 

"In case of rebeUion or invasion, His 
Majesty has, by virtue of his prerogative, a 
right to martial law." 



Lord Castlereagh, in defense of the bill, 
said: 

"I perfectly understand that the prerog- 
ative of the crown authorizes those acting 
under its authority to exercise martial law. 
I maintain that it is a constitutional niode 
for the Executive Government to exercise 
martial law in the first instance, and to 
come to Parliament for indemnity after- 
ward, and is preferable to applying to Par- 
liament first. ***** 

"The only circumstance in mind is 
whether, if the necessity exists, this is the 
proper remedy? If it be so, we ought not 
to take alarm at a dejjarture from princi- 
ple, which is necessary for the preservation 
of the Constitution itself" 

Sir L. Parsons, opposing the bill, said : 

" He thought the measure unnecessary. 
The Executive Government could resort to 
martial law, if it was necessary to suppress 
rebellion." 

Mr. Gray, who also opposed it, said: 

"It was better that the Executive Gov- 
ernment should resort to what has been 
called (he thought, not legally) its preroga- . 
tive of proclaiming martial law. That was 
no prerogative of the crown, but rather an 
act of power sanctioned by necessity, mar- 
tial law being a suspension of the King's 
peace. But it was better that martial law 
should proceed from the Executive Govern- 
ment in urgent moments, than to be the 
work of the Legislature, on every slight pre- 
tense." 

In the rebellion in Ceylon, in 1848, the 
Governor proclaimed martial law, and tried 
and executed many rebels. His conduct 
was severely criticised in England, upon the 
ground that it was unnecessary; and in an 
able review in the Quarterly, volume 83, page 
127, it is said : 

"We shall define martial law to be the 
law of necessity, or defense. The right 
which a Governor of a colony has to pro- 
claim martial law over subjects, may be said 
to bear a close analogy to the right which 
an individual, in absence of legal protec- 
tion, has to slay an assailant. In both 
cases, the evil must be grave. In both 
cases, all regular means of defense must be 
exhausted, or beyond reach, before the ag- 
grieved party resorts to extremities. In 
both cases, the burthen of proof lies on him 
who has ventured on such an expedient, 
and, if he fails to vindicate himself, he is 
liable to severe punishment." 

Hallem I, Const Hist, p. 240, says: 

" There may, indeed, be times of pressing 
danger, when the conservation of all de- 
mands a sacrifice of the legal rights of a 
few; there may be circumstances that not 
only justify, but compel the temporary 
abandonment of constitutional forms. It 
has been usual for all governments, dur- 
ing an actual rebellion, to proclaim martial 
law, or the suspension of civil jurisdiction. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



15 



And this anomaly, I must admit, is very far 
from being less indispensable at such un- 
happy seasons, in countries where the ordi- 
nary mode of trial is by jury, than where 
the right of decision rests in the Judge." 

Coming now to our own country, the same 
doctrine is laid down even more explicitly, 
and by higher sanctions than in England. 
In the debate in Congress upon the subject 
of martial law proclaimed by General Jack- 
son in New Orleans, Robert J. Walker, in 
the Senate, submitted a report upon this 
subject, in which he said: 

" Thfe law which justified this act, was the 
great law of necessity; it was the law of ' 
self-defense. This great law of necessity — 
of defense of self, of home, and of coun- 
try — never was designed to be abrogated by 
any statute, or by any constitution." 

Mr. Payne, of Alabama, also speaking 
upon this subject, said: 

" I shall not contend that the Constitution 
or laws of the United States, authorize the 
declaration of martial law by any authority 
whatever ; on the contrary, it is unknown 
to the Constitution or laws." 

And, commenting on th^ argument that 
if the Constitution did not authorize it, the 
General ought not to declare martial law, 
he says : 

"Who could tolerate this idea? An Ar- 
nold might, but no patriotic American 
could. I may be asked, upon what princi- 
ple a commander can declare martial law, 
when it is so evident that the Constitution 
or laws afford him no authority to do so? I 
answer, upon the principle of self-defense, 
which rises paramount to all written laws; 
and the justification of the officer who 
assumes the responsibility of acting on that 
principle, must rest upon the necessity of 
the case." 

Mr. Livingston, in a written document 
submitted by General Jackson to the Court, 
gave his opinion as follows : 

" On the nature and effect of the procla- 
mation of martial law by Major General 
Jackson, my opinion is, that such proclama- 
tion is unknown to the Constitution and 
laws of the United States ; that it is to be 
justified only by the necessities of the case," 
etc. 

During the Dorr revolution in Rhode 
Island, when an attempt was made to array 
a military force against the old State Gov- 
ernment, and supplant it with a more dem- 
ocratic form, the State Government pro- 
claimed martial law throughout the State. 
A house was brpken open to make an ar- 
rest without warrant, under martial law; 
and subsequently an action of trespass was 
commenced to try the legality of the act. 
It was taken to the Supreme Court of the 
United States, and is reported, Luther vs. 
Borden, 7 Howard, 1. 

It is to be noticed that this case presented 
the precise question at issue now before this 



Court, for the determination of the highest 
Court in the land. The case was not the 
suspension of the habeas corpus, but it was 
for trespass, by breaking into houses with- 
out warrant, which was clearly illegal, un- 
less the existence of martial law could be 
recognized as. affording a defense. 

Chief Justice Taney says: 

"Unquestionably, a State may use its 
military power to put down an armed in- 
surrection too strong to be controlled by 
the civil authority. The power is essential 
to the existence of every government, es- 
sential to the preservation of order and 
free institutions, and is as necessary to the 
States of this Union as to any other Gov- 
ernment. The State, itself, must determine 
what degree of force the crisis demands ; 
and if the Government of Rhode Island 
deemed the armed opposition so formidable 
and so ramified throughout the State as to 
require the use of its military force, and a 
declaration of martial law, we see no ground 
upon which this Court can question its au- 
thority. It was a state of war, and the 
established Government resorted to the 
rights and usages of war to maintain itself, 
and to overcome the unlawful opposition. 
And in that state of things, the officers en- 
gaged in its military service might lawfully 
arrest any one who, from the information 
before tliem, they had reasonable grounds 
to believe was engaged in the insurrection, 
and might order a house to be forcibly en- 
tered and searched, when there were rea- 
sonable grounds for supposing he might be 
there concealed. Without power to do 
this, martial law and the military array of 
the Government would be mere parade, and 
rather encourage attack than repel it." 

Justice Woodbury dissented upon the 
ground that a Stat« could not declare mar- 
tial law, inasmuch as the war power, of 
which it formed a part, was lodged exclu- 
sively in the General Government. 

The question, then, for this Commission 
to determine, is, whether, with this armed 
force threatening the life of the nation, the 
leaders here among you, secretly and cov- 
ertly, as it is claimed — for this is to be a 
matter of proof — attempting to strike at 
your camps, destroy the military forces that 
are guarding them, release the rebel pris- 
oners there confined, then to move into a 
State, partly occupied by rebels, seize your 
supplies and munitions of war at Louisville 
and other points throughout the country — 
the question, I say, is, whether these men 
shall be dealt with by the civil or by the 
military law; whether in this crisis they 
shall be permitted to avail themselves of 
the slow process of civil justice, to be re- 
leased upon bail, again to take the lead of 
these disloyal forces, and move again in 
their work of treason and anarchy — or 
whether the Government shall use the 
power rightfully belonging to it for its self- 



16 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



preservation? I repeat the language I have 
quoted, and say, that only an Arnold would, 
in such a case, hesitate in the course he 
would recommend. Xo officer who is faith- 
ful to his ti'ust, who respects his Govern- 
ment, who loves his home, and desires the 
peace and prosperity of the citizens of that 
home, would desire to wait till it was too 
late to save the Government, and, with it, 
all he holds dear. Seeing this necessity for 
action, the military arm of the Govern- 
ment moved. It seized this man, believed 
to be one of the leaders — whether he be or 
not, will be a matter of proof before this 
Commission — and of the power of this Com- 
mission to try him there can be no more 
doubt, than of the power of the Govern- 
ment to declare martial law. As to the 
question of the power of the Government 
to declare martial law throughout a part or 
the whole of this land, there can be no 
doubt, that having been decided by the 
mightiest tribunal of the land — the Court 
of last resort. It only remains for this 
Commission to take up the facts of the 
case, and determine whether or not they 
are as presented in the charges and specifi- 
cations. 

In conclusion, I submit, that while the 
rights and liberties of the citizen are in 



all cases to be held most sacred and invio«l 
late, we are uot, in our admiration of thatj 
general principle, to lose sight of that higher 
and still more sacred duty of protecting 
the hfe and liberty of the nation; I might 
say of the lives and liberties of the millions 
who compose that nation. Let us not, in 
our attempt to protect the forms of the 
Constitution, sacrifice its life. What is that 
Constitution worth to this land if the na- 
tion, which is its life, be destroyed? Shall 
we, in our fear of interfering with the forms 
of that Constitution, hesitate to stop the 
wound that is bleeding its life away ? There 
is something beyond the rights of a single 
individual — something more sacred than his 
personal liberty, when that hberty can be 
shown to have been used to imperil the life 
of the nation — and that is, the life and lib- 
erty of the millions of loyal citizens for 
whom this Government was established, 
and by whom, with God's help, it wiU ever 
be upheld. 

The court-room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. On being reopened, the Judge 
Advocate announced that the plea was 
overruled, and that the Commission would 
proceed to the trial of the accused. 

The Commission adjourned, to meet on 
Tuesday, September 27, at 2 o'clock, P. M. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



17 



CouET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
September 27, 1804, 2 o'clock, P. M.( 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

The same members present as on Friday, 
September 23d; also the Judge Advocate, 
the accused, and his counsel. 

Colonel C. D. Murray being in Court, and 
having heard read the Order convening the 
Commission, the accused was asked if he 
had any objection to Colonel Murray taking 
his seat on the Commission, to which he re- 
plied, "1 have not." 

Colonel Murray being then duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, in the presence of 
the accused, took his seat on the Commis- 
sion. 

The accused was then arraigned on the 
following charges and specifications : 

CHAKGES AND SPECIFICATIONS 

PREFERRED AGAINST 

HARRISON H. DODD, 

A Citizen of the State of Indiana, United Sialei 
of America. 



CHARGE FIRST.— Coyispiraaj against the 
GovernmeM of the United States. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did, with William 
A. Bowles, of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, 
of Kentucky, Richard Barrett, of the State 
of Missouri, and others, consjiire against 
the Government and duly constituted au- 
thorities of the United States, and did join 
himself to, and secretly organize and dis- 
seminate, a secret society or order, known 
as the Order of American Knights, or Order 
of the Sons of Liberty, having a civil and 
military organization and jurisdiction, for 
the purpose of overthrowing the Govern- 
ment and duly constituted authorities of 
the United States. This at or near the 
city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about 
the 16th day of May, 1864. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd, during an existing 
rebellion against the Government and au- 
thorities of the United States, said rebellion 
claiming to be in the name and on behalf 
of certain States, being a part of and owing 
allegiance to the United States, did com- 
bine and agree with one William A. Bowles, 
to adopt and impart to others the creed or 
ritual of a secret society or order, known 
as the Order of American Knights, or Order 
of the Sons of Liberty, denying the author- 
ity of the United States to coerce to sub- 
mission certain citizens of said United 
States, designing to lessen thereby the pow- 
er and prevent the increase of the armies 
of the United States, and thereby did re- 
cognize and sustain the right of the citizens 



and States then in rebellion to disregard 
and resist the authority of the LTnited 
States. This at or near the city of Indi- 
anapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th 
day of May, 1864. 

Specification Third. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd, then a citizen of 
the State of Indiana, owing true faith and 
allegiance to the Government of the United 
States, and while pretending to be a peace- 
ful and loyal citizen of said Government, 
did secretly and covertly combine, agree, 
and conspire with one William A. Bowles, 
of the State of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, 
of the State of Kentucky, Richard Barrett, 
of the State of Missouri, and others, to 
overthrow and render powerless the Gov- 
ernment of the United States, and did, in 
pursuance of said combination, agreement, 
and conspiracy with said parties, form and 
organize a society or order, and did assist in 
extending said secret order or organization, 
known as the Order of American Knights, 
or Order of the Sons of Liberty, whose in- 
tent and purpose was to cripple and render 
powerless the efforts of the Government of 
the United States in suppressing a then 
existing formidable rebellion against the 
Government of the LTnited States. This 
on or about the 16th day of May, 1864, at 
or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana. 

Specification Fourth. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did conspire and 
agree with William A. Bowles, David T. 
Yeakle, L. P. Milligan, Andrew Humphreys, 
John C. Walker, and J. F. Bullitt— these 
men at that time holding military positions 
and rank in a certain secret society or or- 
ganization known as the Order of Ameri- 
can Knights, or Order of the Sons of Lib- 
erty — to seize, by force, the LTnited States 
and State Arsenals, at Indianapolis, Indi- 
ana, and Columbus, Ohio; to release, by 
force, the rebel prisoners held by the au- 
thorities of the United States, at Camp 
Douglas, Illinois; Camp Morton, Indiana; 
and Camp Chase, Ohio ; and at the Depot 
of Prisoners of War, on Johnson's Island ; 
and to arm tliose prisoners with the arms 
thus seized; that then said conspirators, with 
all the force they were able to raise from the 
secret order above named, were, in con- 
junction with the rebel prisoners thus re- 
leased and armed, to march into Kentucky, 
and co-operate with the rebel forces to be 
sent to that State by the rebel authorities, 
against the Government and authorities of 
the United States. This on or about the 
20th day of July, 1864, at or near the city 
of Chicago, Illinois. 

CHARGE SECOND.— Affording aid and conrr 
fort to rebels against the authority of the Urn- 
ted States. 

Specification First. — In this, that the said 
Harrison H. Dodd, being then a member 
of a certain secret society, or order, knowu 



18 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



as the Order of the American Knights, or Or- 
der of the Sons of Liberty, the United States 
then being in arras to suppress a rebellion 
in certain States against the authority of 
the United States, and said Dodd, then and 
there acting as a member and Grand Com- 
mander, so styled, of said secret society 
or order, did design and plot to communi- 
cate with the enemies of the United States, 
and did communicate with the enemies of 
the United States, with the intent that 
they should, in large force, invade the ter- 
ritory of the United States, to-wit, the States 
of Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois, with the 
further intent that the so-called secret so- 
ciety, or order aforesaid, should then and 
there co-operate with the said armed forces 
of the said rebellion against the authority of 
the United States. This at or near Indian- 
apolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th day 
of May, 1864. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd, while the Govern- 
ment of the United States was attempting 
by force of arms to suppress an existing re- 
bellion, and while guerrillas and other 
armed supporters of said rebellion, were in 
the State of Kentucky, did send a messen- 
ger — then a brother member with him of a 
secret society or order, known as the Order 
of American Knights or Sons of Liberty — 
into said State of Kentucky, with instruc- 
tions for J. F. Bullitt, Grand Commander 
of said secret society or order in said State, 
and other members of said secret society 
or order in said State, to select good couri- 
er or runners, to go upon short notice, and 
for the purpose of assisting those in rebel- 
lion against the United States, to call to 
arras the raerabers of said secret society or 
order, and other sympathizers with the ex- 
isting rebellion, whenever a signal should be 
given by the authorities of the said secret 
society or order. This at or near Indian- 
apolis, Indiana, on or about the I6th day 
of May, 1864. 

Specification Thiro. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd, during an existing 
rebellion against the authority of the Uni- 
ted States, he knowing that in Kentucky 
there were various armed forces in the inter- 
est of said rebellion, and that said State 
was in constant danger of invasion by fur- 
ther rebel forces, did attempt tlierein to 
organize and extend a secret society or 
order, known as the Order of American 
Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, 
having for its object to aid and assist said 
rebellion, and to treat the United States 
Government, in its efforts to suppress said 
rebellion, as a usurpation. This at or 
near Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 
16th day of May, 1864. 

Specification Fourth. — In this, that the 
8aid Harrison H. Dodd, being a citizen of 
the State of Indiana, United States of 
America, owing true allegiance to the said 



United States, did join himself to a certain 
secret society or order, known as the Order 
of American Knights, or Order of the Sons 
of Liberty, the object of which society or 
order was hostile to, and designed for the 
overthrow of, the Government of the Uni- 
ted States, and to compel terms with the 
citizens or authorities of the so-called Con- 
federate States, the same being portions of 
the United States in rebellion against the 
authority of the United States, and did com- 
municate the designs and intent of said 
order to those in rebellion against the Gov- 
ernment of the United States. This at or 
near Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 
I6th day of May, IS64. 

CHARGE THIRD.— Inciting Insurrection. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did, during a time 
of war between the United States and 
armed enemies of the United States, or- 
ganize, and attempt to arm, a portion of 
the citizens of the United States, through a 
secret society or order, known as the Amer- 
ican Knights, or Oi'der of the Sons of Lib- 
erty, with the intent to induce them, with 
him, to throw off the- authority of the 
United States, and co-operate with an armed 
insurrection, then existing against the le- 
gally constituted authorities of the United 
States. This at or near Indianapolis, Indi- 
ana, on or about the I6th day of May, 1864. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did, by public ad- 
dresses, and by secret circulars and coniniu- 
nications, and by other means, endeavor to 
and did arouse sentiments of hostility to the 
Government of the United States, and did 
endeavor to induce the people openly to 
revolt against said Government, and to se- 
cretly arm and organize themselves, for 
the purpose of resisting the laws of the 
United States and the orders of the duly 
elected President thereof This at or near 
the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or 
about the 16th day of February, 1864. 

CHARGE FOURTH— Disloyal Practices. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd, during an armed 
rebellion against the legally constituted au- 
thorities and Government of the United 
States, did counsel and advise citizens of, 
and owing allegiance and Military service 
to, the United States, to disregard the au- 
thority of the United States, and to resist 
a call or draft, designed to increase the 
armies of the United States. This at or near 
the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or 
about the 16th day of May, 1864. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Harrison II. Dodd did accept and hold 
the office of Grand Commander, or Com- 
mander-in-Chief of the Military forces, for 
the State of Indiana, in a certain secret 
society or order, known as 'the Order of 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



19 



American Knights, or Order of the Sons of 
Liberty, which said officer and order were 
unknown to the Constitution or Laws of the 
United States, and were not in aid of, but 
opposed to, the constituted legal authori- 
ties thereof. This at or near the city of 
Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th 
day of February, 1864. 

Specification Third. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did appoint, and 
aid to appoint, and did recognize, within 
the State of Indiana, and within the ju- 
risdiction of the United States , and while 
acting as Grand Commander, or Command- 
er-in-Chief, of certain Military forces, in the 
State of Indiana, a certain secret society or 
order, known as the Order of American 
Knights, or the Order of the Sons of Lib- 
erty, certain persons by the title and grade 
of Major General, the same being unknown 
to the Military Laws of the United vStates, 
or to the Military Laws of the State of In- 
diana, and did treat and accredit them as 
such, subordinate to him as Grand Com- 
mander, for the purpose of creating and 
perfecting a military organization within the 
United States, hostile to, and designed to 
overthrow, the Government and the legally 
constituted authorities of the United States. 
This at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indi- 
ana, on or about the 1 6th day of May, 1864. 

Specification Fourth. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did, while assuming 
to act as Grand Commander, or Command- 
er-in-Chief, of certain Military forces in the 
State of Indiana, and within the jurisdic- 
tion of the United States, of a certain order, 
known as the Order of American Knights, 
or Order of the Sons of Liberty, recognize 
as the highest Military authority in the 
United States an officer unknown to the 
Constitution and Laws of the United States, 
styled Supreme Commander, or Command- 
er-in-Chief of all Military forces belonging 
to the order in the various States, for the 
United States, said officer being recognized 
by said Dodd as clothed with authority 
over all the military forces of said order 
within the United States when called into 
active service, and holding his, the said 
Dodd's, obligation of obedience to said Su- 
preme Commander to be absolute and un- 
limited, and paramount to the laws of the 
land, or orders emanating from the author- 
ities or President of the United States. This 
at or near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, 
on or about the 17th day of February, 1864. 

Specificatiox Fifth. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did attempt to pre- 
vent the further enlistment of citizens in 
the armies of the United States, declaring 
the Government thereof to be a usurpation, 
and to be expelled by force of arms ; and 
did take, and cause other citizens to take, 
a solemn oath, inconsistent with and in 
violation of their duties as citizens of the 
United States, and did attempt to armi cer- 



tain disloyal citizens of the United States, 
for the purpose of resisting the laws and 
duly constituted authorities of the Unite<i 
States, and for the purpose. of establishing, 
or assisting to establish, a separate and 
independent government within the limits 
of the United States. This at or near the 
city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about 
the 17th day of February, 1864. 

CHARGE FIFTH.— Violation of the. Laws 
of War. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did, while the Uni- 
ted States were carrying on war against the 
enemies of the United States, and while 
pretending to be a peaceable, loyal citizen 
of the United States, violate his allegiance 
and duty as a citizen of said Government, 
and did attempt to introduce said armed 
enemies of the United States into the loyal 
States of the United States, thereby to 
overthrow and destroy the authority of the 
United States. This at or near the city of 
Indianapolis, Indiana, on or about the 16th 
day of May, 1864. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Harrison H. Dodd did, during a war 
between the United States and the ene- 
mies of the United States, and while pre- 
tending to be a peaceable, loyal citizen of 
the United States, organize and extend a 
certain secret society or oi'der, known as the 
Order of American Knights, or Sons of 
Liberty, having for its purpose the same 
general object and design of the said ene- 
mies of the United States, and with the 
intent to aid and insure the success of said 
enemies in their resistance to the legally 
constituted authorities of the United States, 
This at or near the city of Indianapolis, 
Indiana, on or about the 16th day of May, 
1864. H. L. BURNETT, 

Judge Advocate Department of the Ohio and 

JVorihem Department. 

To which Charges and Specifications, to 
all and severally, the accused pleaded Not 
Guilty. 

Felix G. Stidger, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced into Court, 
and being duly sworn by the Judge Advo- 
cate, testified as follows :*■ 

Question by the Judge Advocate. State 
your name and place of residence. 

Answer. Felix G. Stidger. I resided all 
the summer in Louisville till the first of 
September; I am now living in Illinois. I 
resided four months and a half in Louis- 
ville before going to Illinois. 



*The admirable manner in wuich Mr. Stidger acted the 
part of a United States Detective, was shown by the fact, 
that tip to the moment of his appearance as a witness, tho 
accused had no suspicion of hlo uemg other than a 
co-conspirator, ai lue instant of Stidger's appearance 
on the witness stand, Dodd stared at him in bewildered 
surprise, as though he found it difficult to admit tl« •ri- 
deuce of hi« own t'euees. 



20 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Q. Whe/e did you live previous to that 
time? 

A. I was in Taylorsville, Kentucky, thirty- 
one miles south-east of Louisville, for ten 
months previous to that. 

Q. Are you a native of Kentucky ? 

A. I am, sir. 

Q. Please to state to the Commission 
where, if ever, you had. any knowledge of 
the existence of a secret society, or order, 
known as the Order of American Knights, 
or Order of the Sons of Liberty; when your 
attention was first directed to it, and how. 

A. (!)n the 6th day of May I started from 
Louisville, Kentucky, and went to Dr. 
Bowles and conversed with him on the 
subject of the Order of the Sons of Liberty. 
He gave me the first information on the 
subject. 

Q. State how you came to go to Dr. 
Bowles' to converse upon that subject. 

A. 1 was sent there by Captain S. E. 
Jones, Provost Marshal of the District of 
Kentucky, to converse with Dr. Bowles 
upon the subject of this secret order. 

Q. Did you, in that conversation, learn of 
the existence of any such order? 

A. Yes, sir, I did. 

Q. State what was your next step in ob- 
taining information upon the subject. 

A My next information was in a second 
interview I had with Dr. Bowles at his 
house at French Lick Spriniis. That was 
about the 20th of May, I thmk. For the 
first interview I started on the 6th, and 
arrived there on the 9th of May, 1864. 

Q. State whether you were ever initiated 
into any secret order; if so, state when and 
where? 

A. I was regularly initiated in the First 
Temple Degree of the Order of the Sons of 
Liberty only, the Vestibule. The first de- 
gree was given me in Louisville. The 
second degree I heard, but did not take. 
The third degree I was instructed in, in this 
city, by Mr. Harrison. 

Q. When was that? 

A. It was about the 5th or 6th day of 
June, 1864. 

Q. Who is this Mr. Harrison ? 

A. He represented himself as the Secre- 
tary of the Grand Council of this State. 

Q. State where, if ever, you have come 
in contact with Hai-rison H. Dodd, the ac- 
cused, in connection with this organization. 

A. I have. I saw him on the same day 
that Harrison instructed me in the third 
degree. That was on the first Sunday in 
June. 

Q. Where did you first meet Mr. Dodd? 

A. I first saw him in the office of Mr. 
Bingham, editor of the Indianapolis *St'n- 
tinel. 

Q. Who was present? 

A. Mr. Bingham was there — at least I 
received an introduction to a gentleman as 
such. 



Q. What conversation, if any, took place 
between you and Mr. Dodd at that time? 

A. I presented a letter of introduction 
from Judge Bullitt, and was recognized by 
Mr. Dodd as the person referred to in the 
letter. 

Q. What became of that letter? 

A. I gave it to Mr. Dodd. 

Q. Was that any thing more than a letter 
of introduction, or did it accredit you as a 
member of the order? 

A. Here is the letter. [The witness here 
produced the letter.] 

Q. Do you know it to be Judge Bullitt's 
signature? 

A. I saw him sign it. I got the letter 
this morning at General Carrington's head- 
quarters. How it got there, I do not know. 

[The letter referred to was then ofiered 
in evidence by the Judge Advocate.] 

Q. You may now state what your con- 
versation with Mr. Dodd was, when you de- 
livered that letter. 

A. I was sent to Dr. Bowles and Mr. 
Dodd by Judge Bullitt, in reference to Mr. 
Coffin, who was living in this city, and who 
was tlien employed as a Detective officer by 
the Government. My instructions were, 
that Coffin was to be put out of the way at 
all hazards. 

Q. What do you mean by being " put out 
of the way?" 

A. I understood he was to be murdered. 
I stated my instructions to Mr. Dodd. 

Q. From whom did you receive those 
instructions ? 

A. They were from Judge Bullitt to Dr. 
Bowles and Mr. Dodd, and whoever else I 
might think well to communicate it to. 

Q. Who did that message relate to? 

A. To Mr. Coffin, United States Detective. 

Q. What was said by Mr. Dodd in refer- 
ence to that message? 

A. I do not remember distinctly, except 
that Coffin and such men were to be dis- 
posed of 

Q. What injury had Coffin done to Dodd, 
or to Bullitt, or Bowles? 

A. I do not know of any, except that he 
was acquainted with their secrets; I mean 
the secrets of the Order of the Sons of 
Liberty. 

Q. What was done by Dodd in this 
matter ? 

A. There was nothing in particular done, 
but he expressed himself in favor of Coffin 
being disposed of, and that he agreed with 
Judge Bullitt. 

Q. Do you know if Dodd was a member 
of the Order of American Knights, or of 
the Order of the Sons of Liberty? 

A. He did not say in so many words that 
he was. I iound it out afterwaixl, from 
what he said, and from what others said. 

Q. State if any thing was done in refer- 
ence to the contemplated assassination of 
Mr. Coffin, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



21 



A. Not at that time. 

Q. How long were you present in your 
interview with Mr. Dodd ? 

A. Probably an hour, or more. 

Q. Was that the only subject under dis- 
cussion ? 

A. Nothing particular do I recall now, 
except some outside matters. 

Q. Was any thing said at that interview 
respecting the Order ? 

A. Not a word. 

Q. When did you next see Dodd? 

A. On the 14th day of June. It was the 
5tli or 6th of June that I first saw him. It 
was the first Sunday in June. 

Q. How are you able to fix the dates of 
these interviews with exactness? 

A. By knowing the date of the meeting 
of the Grand Council of the Order of the 
Sons of Liberty, which was on that day. 

Q. Where did they meet ? 

A. In the fourth story of the building 
occupied by Mr. Dodd, as printer. 

Q. Were you present at that time at that 
meeting? 

A. I was. 

Q. State how many persons you met at 
that time, and mention their names. 

A. I can recollect Mr. Dodd, Mr. Harri- 
son, Dr. Bowles, Mr. Milligan, Mr. Hum- 
phreys, and Dr. Gatling,* and there were 
others whose names I do not remember. 

Q. What process had one to go through 
to gain admission to those meetings ? 

A. It was by a password. The jjassword 
was the word of the order. On the day re- 
ferred to, the password was "America." 

Q Was that the word by which you 
gained admission to the meeting? 

A. No, sir; I was in the room when the 
meeting commenced. I was known as a 
third degree member, and the word was 
given after I got into the room. It was 
given to every person in the room by Mr. 
Dodd. 

Q. Did you at the time hold any office ? 

A. Yes, sir ; I was Secretary of the Grand 
Council for the State of Kentucky. At that 
time we had no organized Grand Council. 
I was appointed by the Chief Officer of the 
State. 

Q. Who was that? 

A. Judge Bullitt. 

Q. Do you still hold that position in Ken- 
tucky? 

A. I do not know if such an office now 
exists ; but if it does, I may still be consid- 
ered as holding that jjosition. 

Q. Do I understand that you were at that 
Hieeting on the 14th or 15th of June, 1864? 

A. Yes, sir, I was ; and Mr. Dodd was 
there too. 

Q. State, as nearly as you can, what took 
place at that meeting. 



*The inventor of the gun, with reroWing rifle barrels, 
mounted on wheels, known as the Galling gun, and 
exhibited in many Northern cities during 1361. 



A. Mr. Dodd opened the meeting by re- 
marking that they wanted to define the 
politics of the order ; if they had any, he 
wanted to know what they were. Commit- 
tees were appointed to consider the military 
organization of the order. There was also 
a Committee on Education, and one to ex- 
amine into a secret discovery of a member 
of the order; and there were other com- 
mittees, the objects of which I do not now 
recollect. Then the case of Coffin Avas 
brought up before the Council and discussed 
at length. 

Q. Do you mean before the whole meet- 
ing ? 

A. Yes, sir, before the whole Council. 

Q. What was the nature of that discus- 
sion? 

A. About various things Coffin had done 
as a detective for the benefit of the United 
States Government ; and it was finally de- 
cided that he should be muixiered. 

Q. Was that the decision of the order ? 

A. Yes, sir. It was known that there 
was to be a meeting at Hamilton, Ohio, on 
the next day, and it was supposed Coffin 
would be there. Mr. Dodd called on the 
meeting to know what members would vol- 
unteer to go to the meeting with him, to 
put Coffin out of the way. There was a 
man by the name of McBride, from Evan.s- 
ville, ind., who said he Icnew Mr. Coffin 
well, but he was sorry he was so situated 
he could not go. That closed the proceed- 
ings of the morning, and is all I remember 
of it now. We met from 10 to 12 o'clock. 
In the evening the committee reported; 
they reported in favor of a military organi- 
zation of the order, and of organizing and 
equipping as rapidly as possible. That com- 
mittee was composed of Dr. Bowles, Mr. 
Milligan, Dr. Gatling, and other names I do 
not remember. I distinctly remember that 
they wished the military organization should 
be completed as quickly as possible. Some 
proposed to raise means by taxing the mem- 
bers of the Order ; some by subscriptions ; 
and others voted that the members should 
individually arm themselves. They finally 
decided that each sub-district should arm as 
they could. The subject of education was 
discussed, and a resolution was offered on 
the subject, recommending the establish- 
ment of Democratic schools. I do not re- 
member whether the resolution was over- 
ruled or not. 

Q. Was any thing further done respecting 
Coffin, at the morning meeting ? 

A. His case was put off till the evening. 
It was discussed both morning and evening. 
Mr. Dodd volunteered to go to Hamilton, 
and, if Coffin was there, to dispose of him ; 
and he wanted to know who would go with 
him, as I have before stated. 

Q. What was the final arrangement for 
disposing of Coffin, at Hamilton? 

A. I met Mr. Dodd and Dr. Bowles. They 



22 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



aeked me if I had seen Coffin. I told them 
that I did not know the man. They said 
they did not beheve he was there; they 
hunted for him, but could not find him at 
the meeting, and nothing further was deter- 
mined ujDon with respect to the day, or 
place of rendezvous. 

Q. State, if you know, how far the organ- 
ization of this order partook of the nature 
of a military organization, and whether 
tliey had drills, and officers, and reports, 
similar to those appertaining to the organi- 
zation of an army. 

A. I can not say any thing more than 
what I was told. Dr. Bowles told me that 
he had his command organized, and divided 
into regiments and companies, and officers 
appointed, except in one district, and he 
told me that he was going to organize that 
district, and that they were drilling at any 
snatch times they could get. 

Q. When was this told to you ? 

A. Previous to that meeting. 

Q. Do you know, of your own knowledge, 
any thing of the military organization of 
the order ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever see them drilling ? 

A. No, sir, and know of none, except 
what Dr. Bowles and other members of the 
order told me. 

Q. Did Mr. Dodd tell j^ou any thing at 
any time about drilling ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. State when next you saw Dr. Bowles 
or Mr. Dodd, and where — that is, after the 
meeting on the 14th day of June, 1864. 

A. I next saw Dr. Bowles in Louisville, at 
the Louisville Hotel. I think I never saw 
Mr. Dodd any-where except here, and once 
in Hamilton. 

Q. What was Bowles doing at Louisville? 

A. He was getting up and superintending 
the Greek fire arrangement. He had a 
chemist there, and was experimenting and 
explaining it to the members who were 
present. This Greek fire, as it was called, 
was invented by a man named R. C. Beck- 
ing.* The members of this order were to 
use it for the purpose of destroying Govern- 
ment property. 

Q. Did you see Bowles there with this 
man Becking? 

A. Yes, sir, I did ; he was experimenting 
and explaining. 

Q. Had you any further talk with Bowles 
about the military organization of this or- 
der at that time? 

A. Yes, sir. It was in substance the same 
ae the conversation we had had befoi-e, 
namely, tliat they werp comj)leting their 
military organization as fast as possible. 

Q. Did lie say that they were drilling? 

A. No, sir. 



* A repideiit of Ciucinuati ; furmerly a commission 
nierrhant. Siibsi-quuutly a captaiu uf artillery, Uuited 
Sialfn VohiiUrers. 



Q. Did he say any thing about opposing 
the draft and enlistments? 

A. I do not remember that any thing was 
said about that. They did not seem to care 
about the draft. 

Q. Was any thing said about it at the 
meeting ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What was their avowed purpose then? 

A. Their organization was for the general 
purpose of opposing the Government in 
every possible way, and by force of arms, 
and they expected to co-operate with the 
rebel forces. 

Q. Who told you so ? 

A. Mr. Dodd and Dr. Bowles both told me 
so. 

Q. What further passed between you and 
Dr. Bowles at Louisville ? 

A. He was present at the experiments. 
He introduced us to the company, and this 
man Bocking went to work to explain the 
hand grenades, and the machine for setting 
boats and Government buildings on fire. 
This machine will set a building on fire at 
a given time ; it is something like a clock. 
It is wound up, and at a certain time it will 
set any boat or building on fire, in which it 
may be left. It is put in a box or trunk, 
and might be put on board a boat or left 
in a house without exciting any suspicion. 
Mr. Bocking also had a muster-roll of rebel 
prisoners, that were designed to be turned 
over to the rebel army. He said a part of 
them who had enlisted in an Indiana Bat- 
tery had deserted in Tennessee, and had 
carried over a portion of a battery with 
them. 

Q. Did Bowles inform you that any Gov- 
ernment stores had been destroyed by this 
invention you have described ? 

A. He did not at that time, but he did 
before. He said that those two boats that 
were destroyed at the wharf, at Louisville, 
were burned by this Greek fire arrange- 
ment. He said that there had been fires 
before, and that they had been caused by 
this Greek fire, and had been done by this 
Order of the Sons of Liberty. 

Q. Did that clone vour interview at Louis- 
ville ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State what your next connection with 
the order was, whom you saw, an 1 what 
was said. 

A. I was in constant coninuiiiication in 
Louisville with Dr. Bullitt and some other 
members of Kentucky, and also when I was 
up here. 

Q. Can you name the next time you saw- 
Mr. Dodd or Dr. Bowles ? 

A. The next time I saw Dr. Bowles wa* 
at his own house, about the last of July. 

Q. What was said and done there? 

A. At that time I had the whole pro- 
gramme of the uprising of the order, and 
every thing they were to do respecting the 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



23 



Beizing of the United States arsenals, the 
liberation of the rebel prisoners, and the 
concentrating of the members of the order. 

Q. From whom did you get this pro- 
gramme ? 

A. From Mr. Dodd. 

Q. Was it given to you in writing ? 

A. No, sir, it was given verbally. He 
pressed upon me the importance of secrecy, 
and reduced nothing whatever to writing. 

Q. Where was he when he gave you this 
information ? 

A. At his business place in this city. 

Q. Did any one else hear the conversation ? 

A. There were others in the room, but no 
one else heard the conversation ? 

Q. How was it that you came to be in this 
city ? 

A. There was to be a meeting in Chicago 
on the 20th day of July, and Judge Bullitt 
left Louisville in time to be here. He was 
expected back in five days from a meeting 
in Chicago. Dodd had been to New York. 
I came to Indianapolis on no particular 
business, but arrived here on the day of 
Drdd's return. I learned from him that the 
programme had all been decided on. He 
told me to get him twenty or thirty good 
runners. They were to notify our men and 
have them ready when Judge Bullitt got 
back. I went down to get on to the train, 
and pretty soon I saw Bullitt come on board. 
He looked as though he had been traveling, 
and he told me that he had just come to 
town on the Bellefontaine train. We went 
into the cars, and he told me that the pro- 
gramme was all arranged. We talked only 
a few minutes, and did not get together 
again during the ride. We kept apart for 

Erudential reasons. In the evening, when 
e got to Jetfersonville, Indiana, he hired a 
buggy, and I was to take him across the 
river. He did not want to go through the 
town. He did not wish his acquaintances 
to know that he was there. He gave me 
the names of A. 0. Brannan and Dr. Bay- 
less, to send them to his house, to whom he 
would impart this programme, and next 
morning I was to send to Dr. Kalfus and 
Mr. W. K. Thomas; and then he said he did 
not care "much if he was arrested. These 
men, he said, covild carry on the organiza- 
tion, and in the uprising they could release 
him. Mr. Thomas was the jailor in Louis- 
ville. Immediately on the landing of the 
boat at the Louisville side, he was arrested, 
and taken to Colonel Farleigh's headquar- 
ters.* 

Q. How did that arrest occur ? 

A. It was caused by an order fronr this 
city. The order said Judge Bullitt would 
be down on the train that day, and that he 
was to be arrested immediately on his arri- 
val there. 



♦Judge liuUitt, on his arrest, was sent to Fort Lafay- 
ette. 



Q. Did he have an interview with the four 
men named? 

A. No, sir : he did not get to see them. 

Q. Did these men belong to the order? 

A. Dr. Kalfus and Mr. Thomas were mem- 
bers of the order. The other two I did not 
see. 

Q. How do you know they were members 
of the order ? 

A. By having met Thomas in the Grand 
Council, and from Dr. Kalfus giving me the 
signs and secrets, and from seeing him give 
them to others.* 

Q. State, as nearly as you can, what was 
the plan that Mr. Dodd and Dr. Bowles in- 
formed you had been arranged at the meet- 
ing in Chicago, and who were the leaders. 

A. I was sent back here on Monday night 
by Kalfus and Thomas, Bullitt being ar- 
rested. I told them of Bullitt's arrest, and 
mentioned the programme to them that 
Bullitt had spoken of — that two gentlemen 
should be sent out there on Saturday, and 
two on Sunday, that Bullitt might impart 
to them the programme. Bullitt did not 
impart it to me, and did not intend to. 
Kalfus made arrangements with Dr. Helm, 
who said he was personally acquainted with 
Mr. Dodd, that he was to come up here if 
he could, but as he did not come up, they 
directed me to come here on Monday night. 
Kalfus and Thomas approved of this order, 
and sent me here to learn from Dodd the 
arrangement and plan agreed upon at Chi- 
cago. I came here and told Dodd of Bul- 
litt's arrest. He asked me if Bullitt was 
searched. I said not. He appeared very 
much excited, and said he hoped they 
treated him like a gentleman, and not 
search him; that he had drafts on Montreal 
for money. He said he told Bullitt, when 
he left Chicago, that he had better not go 
to Canada; that it would create suspicion, 
and that he might have known he would 
be arrested. Mr. Dodd was so much excited 
that he gritted his teeth. 

Q. Where was it you saw Dodd, when you 
informed him of Bullitt's arrest? 

A. It was in Dodd's office, at his business 
house in this city, about nine o'clock in the 
morning. It was Tuesday, and about the 
last of July. I have a memorandum by 
which I can fix the date ; it is the report I 
made to General Carrington at the time. 

Q. You may produce the memorandum. 

A. I have not the report made at that 
time. I gave it to General Carrington in 
person. It was on Tuesday; either the la«t 
Tuesday in July, or the first Tuesday in 
August. 

Q. State what Dodd told you was the 
plan agreed on at Chicago. 

A. Dodd said they had agreed to seize 
the camps of rebel prisoners here — Camp 



*Mr. Stidger, during a portion of the time he wai 
United States Detective, was a "student of medicine" 
in the office of Dr. Kalfus, Louisville. 



24 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Morton; Camp Chase, in Ohio; Camp Doug- 
las, at Chicago, and the Depot of Prison- 
ers, at Johnson's Island. They were going 
to seize the arsenals here, and at Spring- 
field and Chicago, Illinois. They were 
going to arm these prisoners with the arms 
thus seized; raise all the members of the 
order they could, and arm them, andoi'gan- 
ize as many men as they could on the 15th 
or 1 6th of August; for that was fixed as the 
day of the uprising. Each commander was 
to move all his men toward, and concen- 
trate them in, Louisville. They were to get 
the co-operation of Colonel Syphert and 
Colonel Jesse, of the rebel army, who were 
then in Kentucky, and who were to seize 
Louisville, and hold it until their forces 
could co-operate. They were to seize Lou- 
isville and Jeffersonville and New Albany, 
and the rebels were to hold them until 
these forces could come to Louisville to 
assist in holding these jjlaces. 

Q. Was there any ditierence of opinion 
at Chicago as to the course to be taken? 

A. At Chicago there was a difference 
about whether they were to wait until after 
they were sure of the co-operation of rebel 
forces, or go ahead without waiting for the 
rebels. 

Q. How was the matter finally fixed? 

A. Dodd sent Harrison to see Milligan, 
Humphreys, and Walker, and get them here 
before that day. They did not come. Dodd 
read me letters from them, which were not 
signed, but which, he said, were from them. 
They said they were to go ahead at the 
time designated to release and arm the 
prisoners and members of the order, and 
eventually to unite at Louisville. Harrison 
was a messenger who went to see these men, 
and have them come here. I left on Sat^ 
urday. He did not send to Walker, for he 
was in New York, and expected to be here 
that week. He also sent a messenger to 
Dr. Bowles. 

Q. From whom did Dodd read letters to 
you? 

A. He read letters purporting to come 
from Milligan and Humphreys; but I am 
not sure whether there was one from Dr. 
Bowles or not. 

Q. Did you see the signatures or hand- 
writing? 

A. 1 saw the handwriting. 

Q. Did you recognize it? 

A. I did not. 

Q. If Dodd told you who were at Chicago, 
•late who they were? 

A. I did not learn of anyone being there 
but Judge Bullitt, Dr. Bowles, Dick Barrett 
[afterward corrected to James A. Barrett], 
Dodd, and Walker. 

Q. How did you learn that they were there? 

A. From Dodd. He told me they were 
there. He arranged this j^lan. There were 
other persona there from Illinois and from 
this State. 



Q. What day did they meet at Chicago? 

A. The meeting was to have been on the 
20th of July, and was called about that 
time. 

Q. Was it first arranged to have a meet- 
ing earlier than that? 

A. It was first arranged to have a meet- 
ing of the Supreme Council of the Order 
on the first day of July. 

Q. Why did that meeting not take place-? 

A. It was postponed on account of the 
postponement of the National Democratic 
Convention. 

Q. Did it take place on the 20th of July? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you learn from Dodd what rank 
these men had in the order? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What rank did Dodd hold in the 
order? 

A. He was Grand Commander of the 
State of Indiana. 

Q. What rank did Bowles have in the 
order ? 

A. Major General of the order, command- 
ing one of the districts of the State. 

Q. What rank did David T. Yeakle hold? 

A. He had held the same rank as Bowles; 
but was thrown out on the 14th day of 
June, and Walker elected in his place. 

Q. What rank did Milligan hold? 

A. The same as Bowles. 

Q. What rank did Walker hold? 

A. The same as Bowles. 

Q. What was the rank of J. F. Bullitt ? 

A. Grand Commander of the State of 
Kentucky. 

Q. How do the Grand Commanders rank 
in the order, compared with Major Generals? 

A. Grand Commanders rank over Major 
Generals. 

Q. Who composed the meeting at Chi- 
cago? 

A. They were Major Generals and Grand 
Commanders of the order. 

Q. What day was set for the uprising to 
take place? 

A. The first time was set in Illinois, which 
was to be the 3d or 17th of August. Dodd 
told me at the last meeting, the 15th or 
16th was the day set. 

Q. Why do you say it was on the 3d or 
the 17th of August? 

A. That was the day given me by Piper, 
of Springfield. The day was to be as \'al- 
landigham chose. That is what Piper told 
me. 

Q. Who is Piper? 

A. He said he had an appointment on 
V'allandigham's staff. 

Q. What is Vallandigham's rank in the 
Order of the Sons of Liberty? 

A. Supreme Commander of the United 
States. 

Q. Did you learn if his orders were to be 
supreme — above all other orders or laws? 

A. I learned from members of the order, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



25 



that his orders were to be obeyed above all 
other orders, and the books of the order 
taught as much. 

Q. Did you meet Piper as a member of 
the order? 

A. I met him in the Grand Council of 
the State of Kentucky. 

Q. Was the time of this uprising to be as 
Vallandigham should determine? 

A. That was the first programme. The 
day had been set from the 3d to the 17th, 
and if they were sufficiently ready, he was 
to decide on which day they should rise. 

Q. Where was this uprising to be? 

A. It was to be genei'al in Ohio, Indiana, 
Illinois, Missouri, and as much of Kentucky 
as could be worked. 

Q. Did you know of Dodd, or any mem- 
bers of the order, taking steps to commu- 
nicate to rebels any thing about the order ? 

A. I know of members of the order do- 
ing so. A rebel colonel was given the 
secrets of the order, and requested to dis- 
seminate them at the South. Judge Bullitt 
admitted to me that he had tried to have 
a conference with Colonel Jesse. 

Q. Who else did he communicate with? 

A. He also sent a man to have a confer- 
ence with Colonel Syphert, of the rebel 
army, to ascertain when he could best co- 
operate with him, or whether he could use 
his forces in the capture of Louisville. 

Q. With what forces did Bullitt propose 
to co-operate with him? 

A. He proposed to co-operate with the 
forces in this order. 

Q. Was any rebel colonel initiated into 
this order, and given particular instruc- 
tions? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When and where? 

A. In the city of Louisville, in July; 
about the last of July. 

Q. How did he happen to be in Louis- 
ville? 

A. He was there on parole. He tried to 
get the military authorities to banish him 
to Canada; and he told me that he would 
then go South, and take up arms again ; and 
if they did not banish him to Canada, he 
said he would go to Canada any way. From 
there he would go to Mexico, and take the 
oath of allegiance to the Mexican Govern- 
ment, which would release him from his 
oath to the United States Government. He 
would then come back to the South and 
tiike up amis again for the Confederacy. I 
80 reported to Colonel Farleigh, and the 
papers were not given him. He did go to 
Canada. I saw a letter afterward from him 
at Winchester. He sent back for the rit- 
ual and the unwritten work of the order, 
which was to be written in secret cypher 
and sent to him. 

Q. Did he get it ? 

A. He did not, because the military 
authorities had seen the letter before the 



officer to whom it was written got it, or had 
an opportunity of seeing it. 

Q. State whether in any of the meetings 
of these lodges of which Mr. Dodd was a 
member, and at which he was present, he 
there used any language, or performed any 
acts which denied the authority of the Gen- 
eral Government to suppress the rebellion 
by force of arms. If so, what? 

A. He used language which strongly de- 
nied that power to the Government. There 
were no acts performed to my knowledge, 
except what I have already detailed. 

Q. Was there any such language used aa 
that this Government was a usurpation, and 
ought to be set aside ? 

A. The word usurpation was used. Also 
the statement that this Government was a 
"tyrannical usuri^ation," was used in the 
meeting that day. 

Q. Was it said that the Government 
should be resisted because it was a usurpa- 
tion? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was the doctrine inculcated that they 
were to resist the draft ? 

A. It was not. 

Q. Was it inculcated, as a general doc- 
trine, that they were to oppose coercion on 
the part of the Government? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did they, in this order, say that force 
might yet be of use, on the principle of 
overthrowing this Government, and estab- 
lishing independent republics or govern- 
ments within the States now belonging to 
the United States ? 

A. Their design was to carry a portion of 
the States now composing the United States 
into the Southern Confederacy. 

Q. Was any thing said about establishing 
a North-western Confederacy ? 

A. Not in their lodges. It was discussed 
by Dr. Bowles himself, privately. 

Q. What was the general purpose of the 
order ? 

/ A. Its general purpose was to assist the 
[rebellion. 

Q. You may state whether, at the first 
meeting on the 14th of June, any address 
was made by Dodd to the order. If so, 
what it was. 

A. He made no remarks except about the 
purpose of the meeting. 

Q. Was there any written address deliv- 
ered by him ? 

A. The address, which is printed as that 
of the Grand Commander, was made in 
February. I was given copies of it, and 
was told Dodd was Grand Commander at 
that time. 

The Judge Advocate here handed the 
witness a pamphlet containing an address 
by the Grand Commander to the Grand 
Council of the State of Indiana, and asked : 
Is that one of the addresses. 

A. The address in this pamphlet is Dodd'a. 



26 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



The pamphlet is the proceedings of the 
Grand Council of the State of Indiana, at a 
session held the 16th and 17th of February, 
1864. The first time I was here, one of 
them was given me to give to Judge Bullitt, 
and which I gave to him. It was about the 
5th of June. 

Q. Who gave it to you ? 

A. It was given to me by Mr. Harrison. 
All the books of the order I ever received 
were given me by Harrison. 

A pamphlet, entitled " Proceedings of the 
Grand Council," etc., was here introduced 
in evidence by the Judge Advocate. 

The Judge Advocate here read extracts 
from the address referred to, that " Lin- 
coln's Government was a usurpation," etc. 
He then passed to the witness a number of 
pamphlets, from which he requested him to 
select and specify to the Commission the 
ritual, constitution, by-laws, etc., of the Sons 
of Liberty, and state how he knew them to 
be such. 

A. These pamphlets contain the obliga- 
tions of the Vestibule and other obligations 
of the Order of American Knights, and the 
ritual of the Order of American Knights, 
which has now given way to the Order of 
the Sons of Liberty. This order was ex- 
posed, and they made some slight changes 
in the ritual, and called it the Order of 
Sons of Liberty. These books contain 
three parts of the ritual. They contain 
what is known as the ritual and proper 
work of the order given in all the lodges. 

The pamphlets containing the ritual and 
obligations of the order "0. A. K.," were 
here introduced in evidence by the Judge 
Advocate. 

Q. Do you recognize that pamphlet, enti- 
tled "S. L.," as the ritual of the first de- 
gree? 

A. This book contains what is known as 
the Vestibule, or First Temple degree of 
the Order of the Sons of Liberty. 

The pamphlet, entitled "S. L.," was here 
introduced in evidence by the Judge Advo- 
cate. 

Q. Do you recognize the pamphlet enti- 
tled "I." "K. 0. S. L.," as the ritual of the 
second degree ? 

A. That book contains the second and 
third degrees of the order. They are known 
as the conclave degrees, or second and third 
degrees of the order, which are given men 
initiated into the county temples. Eespon- 
sible men are given the three degrees con- 
tained in these books, and in each voting 
precinct of a county where there is a county 
temple, branch temples are organized, in 
which tlie Vestibule and first degrees are 
given, but the members are not given all 
the degrees of the order. Influential men 
are given the three degrees. 

The pamphlet, entitled " I." " K. 0. S. L.," 
was here introduced by the Judge Advocate 
in evidence. 



Q. What is the specific difference between 
the three degrees ? 

A. In the books, there is no particular dis- 
tinction. The members are as much bound 
in the first as in the second or third de- 
gree. More trust is reposed in the mem- 
bers of the second and third degrees, and 
they are given more of the secrets and ulti- 
mate designs of the order. 

Q. Are any but members of the second 
and third degrees permitted to attend, 
meetings of the Grand Council? 

A. If any delegates are elected, who are 
not members of those degrees, they are 
given the second and third degrees at the 
session of the Grand Council — if they are 
not given in the county temple. 

Q. Was the plan for the attack upon the 
arsenals and the camps of prisoners, im- 
parted to any but third degree members? 

A. It might have been imparted to other 
members whom they had confidence in. 

Q. Do you recognize the pamphlet enti- 
tled "General Laws of the S. L.' as per- 
taining to the order? 

A. This pamphlet is the constitution of 
the county temple; which governs the 
workings of the county temples, and is 
regulated by the State Council. 

The pamphlet, entitled "General Laws 
of the S. L.," was here introduced in evi- ( 
dence, by the Judge Advocate. 

Q. Do you recognize the pamphlet, enti- 
tled "Constitution of the Grand Council 
of S. L. of Indiana," as pertaining to the 
order? 

A. That is the Constitution of the State 
Council of Indiana, made by the State 
Council. Each State Council of the order 
makes its own constitution in accordance 
with its own views, but it must not, in any 
particular, be in violation of the Consti- 
tution of the Supreme Council of all the 
States. 

The pamphlet, entitled "Constitution of 
the Grand Council of S. L. of Indiana," 
was here introduced in evidence by the 
Judge Advocate. 

Q. Do you recognize the pamphlet, enti- 
tled "Constitution and Laws of the S. 
G. C," as pertaining to the order? 

A. This pamphlet is the Constitution of 
the Supreme Council of all the States. 

The pamphlet, entitled "Constitution 
and Laws of the S. G. C," was here intro- 
duced in evidence by the Judge Advo- 
cate. 

The Judge Advocate here handed the 
witness a book entitled "Koll of Prisoners," 
and asked: 

Q. Do you recognize that book? * 

A. Harrison had a series of these books, 
which he showed to me and explained the 



■> A xmall account book, contaiDing a list of the mem- 
bers of tho Order of the SoiiB of Liberty, iu Inilianapo- 
Ub; also lists of several cowpauies of rebel priiunen, 
couliued iu Camp Morton. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



27 



manner of keeping them. He told me all 
the names in this list, (witness pointing out 
the list of names, with numbers "1" and "3" 
opposite in parallel column) were those of 
members of the order. Those numbered 
"1" at that time had taken the first 
degree, and those marked "3" had taken 
the third degree. He had a number of 
other books in which he kept the accounts 
with the county temples — the amount 
they had paid in for organization fees, for 
books, for regular monthly dues, and for 
annual dues. They also gave the names of 
the officers of all the county temples which 
had reported to him, the amount due from 
them, the amounts paid, and what for. I 
have seen this book before. It was kept 
by Harrison, and contained the names of 
the members of the order here. 

The book entitled the "Roll of Prison- 
ers," was here introduced in evidence by 
the Judge Advocate. 

Q. Does that book contain the names of 
officers of the county temples? 

A. Harrison had other books which con- 
tained the names of officers of the county 
temples. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Wednesday, September 28, at eight 
o'clock. 

Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
September 28, 1864, 8 o'clock, A. M.) 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present; also the Judge 
Advocate, the accused, and his counsel. 

The proceedings of yesterday were read 
and approved. 

Felix G. Stidger, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, then proceeded with his testimony, 
as follows: 

Question by the Judge Advocate. State 
to the Commission what interviews you 
had with Mr. Dodd at his house, or other- 
wise. 

A. I was at Mr. Dodd's house twice, but 
only saw him there once. It was on a Fri- 
day night. Mr. Harrison was there also, 
and in speaking of the uprising of the 
Sons of Liberty, said something about their 
being rather dilatory. It appeared they 
had not enough arms to be of service. Mr. 
Dodd remarked, that if they did not rise 
he would leave the country, for he would 
be damned if he would live under such a 
Government as the present Administra- 
tion. 

Q. Was or was not that in the con tin 
gency of the order not rising to destroy 
the present Administration? 

A. It was. 

Q. About what date was that? 

A. That was on the Friday night before 
Judge Bullitt was arrested on the Satur- 
day. It was probably the last Friday in 



July, though I will not be sure. Mr. Har- 
rison, Grand Secretary of the State of In- 
diana, was present at the convention. 

Q. Was any plan determined upon at the 
meeting of the order on the 14th of June, 
as to the manner of disposing of Mr. Coffin, 
and how it was to be brought about? 

A. Mr. Dodd expected to find him at 
Hamilton, Ohio, the next day, pick a quar- 
rel with him, if possible, and shoot him. 

Q. How do you know that? 

A. Dodd so expressed it at that meeting. 

The roll of the members of the order for In- 
dianapolis was here handed to the witness. 

Q. Please to look at that roll, and designate 
any of the names you know belonging to 
the Order of the Sons of Liberty. 

A. W. M. Harrison, H. H. Dodd, Joseph 
Ristine. I conversed with him on the sub- 
ject of the order, but never met him at any 
lodge. 

Q. Did he display any knowledge that he 
could not have acquired outside the lodge 
of the order? 

A. He did. 

Q. Who is Joseph Ristine? 

A. Auditor of the State. I have seen 
him in his office. 

Q. Do you recollect the purport of any 
conversation you have had with him ? 

A. I do not recollect any, except some 
thing that was said about a letter which 
was supposed, at the time, to have be^n 
written by Dick Bright. 

The counsel for the accused objected to 
the witness relating any conversation of Mr. 
Ristine, as it had not been shown that he 
was a member of the order, the witness 
having said that he never saw him at any 
lodge of the order. 

The Judge Advocate, in reply, said that it 
had been proved that the book or roll in 
question was kept by an officer of this se- 
cret society; the witness also tetitifi€>d that 
the names on the roll were memb>ja"s of 
the order. The evidence, therefore, fur- 
nished by the book was more reliable than 
if Stidger, the witness, had seen Ristine at 
the lodge. 

The Court was then cleared for delibera- 
tion. On being re-opened, the Judge Advo- 
cate announced to the accused that the ob 
jection was overruled. 

Answer of the witness continued: 

The conversation was in relation to a let- 
ter written to Dodd, Bowles and Ristine, 
and signed "Dick," and supposed to have 
been written by Dick Briglit. The letter 
was a warning against Coffin as a United 
States Detective; that he was watching 
them, and reporting every thing they did. 
I was kept at Ristine's office nearly all day, 
for young Ristine to point Coffin out to me, 
in case he should pass the office. 

Q. Did you ever meet in the Grand Coun- 
cil, persons from other parts of the country, 
besides those here named? 



28 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



A. I have. There was an old gentleman 
by the name of Oty, Dr. Lemans, a Judge 
Borten, from Allen county. He was a large, 
fleshy man. A Mr. Everett, of Yanderberg 
county; Mr. Leech, of Burnt District, Union 
county; Mr. Myers, of Laporte county, and 
Mr. A. D. Kaga of New Amsterdam. These 
were some I became acquainted with on the 
14th of June.. 

Q. Did you ever meet in any of their 
lodges, or as a member of the order, a Mr. 
Lassalle ? 

A. I do not think I met him. On the 
14th of June, he was elected a member of 
the Supreme Council of the United States. 
Mr. Lassalle resides in Cass county. 

Q. State who else was elected that day ? 

A. John G. Davis. 

Q. Did you ever meet a Mr. Heffren ? 

A. Yes, sir, I met him in Salem, Indiana, 
twice. 

Q. Was he a member of the order? 

A. Yes, sir, he was. He was recognized 
as such. I was told by the order that he 
was Deputy Grand Commander of the State 
of Indiana. His name was called on that 
day, but he was not present. He was for- 
merly a Lieutenant Colonel of an Indiana 
regiment. Ue told me himself that he and 
Dodd had a right to call the order together 
at any time they might think proper. 

Q. Did he ever explain, in detail, the na- 
ture and object of the organization? 

A. He told me that they were to co-ope- 
rate with the Confederate forces. The first 
lime I saw him, he supposed I was a Com- 
missioner, sent by the Confederate forces. 
I saw him in Salem, Indiana, on the 6th 
day of May. 

Q. How are you able to fix that date ? 

A. By its being the first day I left Louis- 
ville to join Bowles. 

Q. Did you know Heffren before? 

A. I never saw him before. There was a 
man there by the name of John Drom, 
who pointed him out to me; he is a clothier. 
He took Hefi'ren out and told him that I 
was from Kentucky. This man told me 
that IletiVen was one of the leaders of the 
order. Hetiren then came to me, suppos- 
ing I was a Commissioner sent to him from 
the rebel force. 

Q. Did he approach you as a member of 
the order, making any signs? 

A. No, sir, he did not. When he first ap- 
proached me, he asked if I came on that bu- 
siness. I told him I did not. I then men- 
tioned to him about some regiments of For- 
rest's being disbanded in Kentucky. He 
'Raid he knew it, and that they were to have 
four more, who were to remain at home for 
a time and to concentrate when neces- 
sary. 

Q. For what purpose were they disband- 
ed? 

A. He did not tell me for what particu- 
lar purpose, but, he said, he was expecting a 



commissioner from three of those regiments, 
and he thought I was the person. 

Q. ^Vhat was that commissioner to ar- 
range with him? 

A. I do not know, sir. 

Q. What else was said? 

A. I do not remember any tiling particu- 
lar. A gentleman on the street asked him 
why a certain lady was sent to Salem, Indi- 
ana, and he said they expected trouble in 
Kentucky very soon, and it would be safer 
in Salem than it would be ii:i Kentucky. 

Q. Did Heftren inform you then that 
this organization was for tlie purpose of 
co-oi^erating with the rebels? 

A. Yes, sir, he did. 

Q. Did you ever meet at Louisville a man 
by the name of Piper, that you say was on 
Vallandigham's stafi:*; if so, was he a mem- 
ber of the order ? 

A. Yes sir. I met him there, and he was 
a member of this order. He told me he 
resided in Springfield, Illinois. I do not 
know his first name. 

Q. What was he at Louisville for? 

A. He had been traveling in the eastern 
part of the State, initiating men into the 
order. He was present at the meeting of 
the Grand Council in Kentucky, and assisted 
in opening the meeting. 

Q. What rank did he claim to have on 
Vallandigham's stall'? 

A. He told me he was on his stafl' but he 
claimed no particular appointment. He 
told me that James A. Barrett, formerly of 
St. Louis, now of Chicago, was Chief of 
Staff to Vallandigham, and that Captain 
Hines, of the rebel army, who also was on 
Vallandigham's staft", had charge of the re- 
leasing of the rebel prisoners on John- 
son's Island. 

Q. Was this the man you referred to yes- 
terday ? 

A. It was, and by mistake I gave his 
name as Dick Barrett. It was James A. 
Barrett I referred to in my testimony yes- 
terday. Piper said he had a communica- 
tion from Vallandigham and Bowles, giving 
him charge of the releasing of the rebel 
prisoners at Rock Island, and which was to 
be effected at the same time. 

Q. Where was Hines at that time? 

A. He was in Canada, waiting for the 
time to come. Hines was the same man 
that was afterward captured with Mor- 
gan. 

Q. Do you know where this man Piper is 
now ? 

A. I do not. 

Q. Did you learn of any specific action 
that the branch of the order in Illinois had 
resolved upon, in case Kentucky should re- 
sist the enlistment of negroes? 

A. Piper told me that he had attended a 
meeting of the Grand Council of Illinois, 
and that they had passed a resolution, 
unanimouslv, that if Kentuckv considered 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



29 



it advisable to resist the enlistment of ne- 
groes, that the members of the order in 
Illinois would see that none of the State 
Militia or Loyal Leaguers, as they were 
called, should be allowed to be sent by the 
Government to enforce the measure. 

A shell about the size of a 32-pounder, 
of conical shape, was here handed to the 
witness. The butt of the shell being 
screwed off, showed an interior shell, which 
contained an iron case for the charge of 
powder. 

Q. Have you ever seen this instrument 
before ? If so, state where, and what it is. 

A. I saw an instrument of that kind at 
Bocking's room, at the Louisville Hotel, 
about the 29th or 30th of June. Bowles 
was present, also Dr. Kalfus and Charley 
Miller, and a number of other gentlemen. 
Bocking explained it. The space between 
the innermost case and the inner shell was 
to be filled with liquid Greek fire. The 
space between the inner and outer shell 
was to give room for it to move, so as to ex- 
plode the percussion cap, on its being 
thrown and striking any object. 

Q. What was it to be used for? 

A. It was contemplated to be used for 
the destruction of Government property. 

Q. Is this the same thing that was exhib- 
ited there at that time ? 

A. Yes, sir, and it was for the use of these 
conspirators. 

Q. Was any thing said about their using 
such an instrument ? 

A. Yes, sir ; they said it was just such a 
thing as they wanted. 

A spherical shell was here handed to the 
witness, which unscrewed in the center and 
showed a smaller spherical shell inside. 

Q. Have you seen this before ? 

A. Yes, sir; I saw it at Bocking's room; 
he explained the working of it. The inner 
shell was to be filled with powder, and a 
cap placed on each of the nine nipples 
to be seen on its surface; and round 
a glass vial, which this inner shell con- 
tained, was placed the powder. The glass 
vial contained the Greek fire. On its being 
thrown against any object, and striking, it 
would explode and ignite and set on fire 
whatever it touched. It was designed to be 
used by the hand, and it would require 
Very careful handling to prevent its ex- 
ploding, as the least blow might explode it. 
Bocking mentioned its weight and proba- 
ble expense. 

Q. Did you learn that this instrument 
had been used in the destruction of Gov- 
ernment property; if so, state when and 
where. 

A. I was told by Dr. Bowles that the 
Greek fire had been used for the destruc- 
tion of Government property. Two boats 
had been destroyed at Louisville, in the 
spring, and a number of boats, down the 
river, by the same means, in April or May. 



I am not sure that he did not say some 
boats loaded with Government stores in St. 
Louis. Bocking explained the manner in 
which this Greek fire could be used outside 
of the shells. It might be kept in a thin 
glass vial, and when you wanted to destroy 
any object, all you had to do was to throw 
the glass vial against it, by which the liquid 
would be scattered about, and it would set 
or\ fire every thing it touched. Bocking 
said it might be made so as to ignite in- 
stantly it was scattered, or some time after- 
ward. Bowles said it might be arranged 
with the clock contrivance, to take fire 
some hours afterward. 

Q. Did you learn of the change of the 
name of this order from American Knights 
to the Order of the Sons of Liberty; if so, 
state what time that change was made in 
the different States. 

A. When I was here, I saw Dodd tho first 
of June; he told me that Judge Bullitt and 
Dr. Kalfus had gotten some new work i of 
the order. He told me that the order kad 
been changed. The work on the American 
Knights had been distributed over the 
State, and he wished me to assist in distri- 
buting the new work. I had seen the first 
degree of the Order of American Knights, 
but had never read it. I only saw what 
kind of a looking book it was. 

Q. Was this a new order, or merely a con- 
tinuation of the old one, with changes? 

A. It was a continuation of tlie old order, 
but the name was changed to the Sons of 
Liberty. Those of the Order of American 
Knights were not admitted into the Order 
of the Sons of Liberty, unless they were 
considered worthy. 

Q. Do you know any thing of Dodd's at- 
tempt to extend and increase this order, 
by disseminating the sentiments of the 
order ? 

A. No, sir; I do not know that he did in 
this State. He urged tlie extension of it 
in Kentucky, and organizing it as quickly 
and as thoroughly as possible. 

Q. Do you know of his issuing an ad- 
dress, to be sent to the different members 
of the order? 

A. Yes, sir; I know of the circulation of 
the address exhibited here yesterday. I 
know there were some of them given to 
me to take to Kentucky, and 1 saw Harri- 
son give some of them to persons, whom 
he told me were members of the order in 
this State. 

Q. Was it inculcated in this meeting and 
elsewhere, to the members of this order, 
that in case this order should be called 
into the field, its members were to obey their 
chiefs, and that tlieir oi-ders were to be un- 
questioned, and their commands supreme? 

A. The orders of the chiefs of this or- \ 
ganization were to be above all orders, and • 
above all laws of the United States. They 
were to pay no respect to the orders of the 



30 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



civil authorities, or orders of the General 
Government, but were instructed that the 
orders of their chief were supreme. 
[Close of the examination in chief] 

CROSS-EXAMIXATIOX. 

Became a member of the Order of the 
Sons of Liberty on the 5th of May, 1864. 
Was instructed in the Vestibule degree by 
a United States Detective. Took the first 
degree, in the city of Louisville, about the 
12th of May; did not take the second de- 
gree at all, and was instructed in the third 
degree by HaiTison, the Grand Secretary 
of Indiana, in Indianapolis, about the 1st 
of June. In taking these degi'ees, witness 
participated as a bona Jide member of the 
order; but acted in the character of a de- 
tective from the beginning. Was employed 
by Captain Stephen E. Jones, of Louisville, 
Provost Marshal of the District of Ken- 
tucky, at witness' request, but not in that 
particular service. Was shown a letter, 
written by General Carrington to Captain 
Jones, requesting him to send a Kentuckian 
to Dr. Bowles. Witness was sent in accord- 
ance with that request. Did not at the 
time know of the existence of such an 
order as the Sons of Liberty. Eeceived the 
Vestibule degree before going to Dr. Bowles. 
There were three Temple degrees besides 
the Vestibule degree. 

The meeting at Indianapolis, on the 
14th of June, was a meeting of the dele- 
gates of county temples and chiefs of tlie 
order. Heard the roll of names called; but 
not being personally acquainted with the 
members, could not recall them. 

Respecting the contemplated assassina- 
ation of Coffin, the United States Detective, 
I was sent from Louisville to give Dodd and 
Bowles the opinion of Judge Bullitt, name- 
ly : that it was necessary for the interests 
of the order that Coffin should be put out 
of the way. The matter was discussed in 
Council. Dodd did not discountenance the 
project; but, on the contrary, considered it 
necessary. Was taken to the State Au- 
ditor's office by Mr. Dodd, who requested 
Mr. Ristine's son to show him Coffin should 
he pass. Was there, off and on, in Mr. 
Ristine's front office nearly all day. About 
sundown Coffin was pointed out to him. 
Did not express a wish to meet him and 
kill liim; the words used were, he hoped 
to meet Coffin hereafter " under more favor- 
able circumstances. " This was after the 
Hamilton meeting, which was on the 15th 
of June, the day after the meeting of the 
Council in Indianapolis. Did not, in that 
meeting, insist on going to Hamilton, in 
order to kill Coffin: did not speak in the 
Council that day. Did not know of the 
Hamilton meeting till it was brought up in 
the Council. Went with Dodd and Bowles 
to the meeting at Hamilton. Was appointed 
Grand Secretary of the order, of the Grand 



Lodge of Kentucky, by Judge Bullitt, until 
an election, and was afterward told that he 
had been elected at a meeting of the Grand 
Council. Never met Mr. Coffin at any 
meeting of the Council, nor in any of the 
lodges: knew he was a United States De- 
tective, but did not act in concert with him, 
nor communicate any thing to him. Be- 
came acquainted with Coffin about the 1st 
of June. The pretense of not knowing 
him was a sham, to cover up ulterior ob- 
jects. 

Met Dr. Gatling at Mr. Bingham's office, 
when he (Stidger) first saw Dodd. Gatling 
was at the Grand Council, and was present 
at the discussion of the assassination of Cof- 
fin. Do not know Mr. Humphreys person- 
ally. A gentleman they said was Andrew 
Humphreys, was present at the Council: 
he was a fleshy gentleman — fine-looking — 
about forty years old. Saw Mr. Milligan 
also that day, for the first time. He was a 
tall, bony, tolerably slender man; and was 
an active participant in the proceedings of 
the meeting. He was there morning and 
evening. A man by the name of Thomp- 
son was there; he was appointed on a com- 
mittee. Mr. McBride, of Evansville, also 
was present; he was a very active member, 
and was on the military committee. 

Did not know positively that the order 
was a military organization, never having 
seen the members drill, or with arms in 
their hands; but had heard members of the 
order say that it was a military organiza- 
tion. The Order of the Sons of Liberty 
extended over Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, 
Illinois, Missouri, Wisconsin, New York, 
Pennsylvania, Delaware and Maryland. 
From the North-eastern States they ex- 
pected money, but not men — those States 
were theoretically organized, as far as the 
military phase was concerned. 

Dodd told him of tlie meeting at Chicago 
on the 20th of July, and of the plan of ac- 
tion determined on; did not remember 
whether Dodd said he was present at the 
meeting or not: but he was at Chicago at 
the time. In speaking of the meeting, he 
used the words, "We came to such and such 
conclusions." 

In conversations with members of the 
order, he learned tliat they did not intend 
Indiana and Illinois to be invaded by the 
rebels, if they could help it. The war was 
to be confined to Kentucky and Missouri. 
Indiana and Ohio were to co-operate with 
Kentucky, and Illinois with Missouri. The 
order expected the co-operation of the rebel 
forces, and were to rise at their advance 
The order was to organize and join the 
rebel forces on the border. The point set- 
tled on was Louisville. 

Dr. Bowles said he cared nothing about 
the draft, or the politics of the Govern- 
ment — he said they were engaged in a 
scheme of rebellion against the Government 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



31 



of tho United States. In speaking of the 
movements of tbe order, Dodd and Bowles 
expressed themselves confident of success. 
Dr. Athon, of this city, counseled caution 
and delay, till they were more thoroughly 
organized, and until they could see what 
could be done at the polls. He wa» present 
at the meeting on the 14th of June. He 
also said they should use their military 
power at the polls, if the Government 
attempted to control the elections by bay- 
onets; and that there would be a time when 
it would be pi^oper to use their military 
power against the Government, but that 
time had not yet come. He said it would 
not be changed after election; that an 
outbreak would come after the election 
to resist the Government, both as to its po- 
litical and military policy. The usurpation 
of the Government, such as the suspension 
of the writ of habeas corpus, freeing of the 
negroes, and the general tyrannical acts of 
the Government, they deemed sufficient to 
warrant military operations against the 
Government. Dr. Athon expressed this 
opinion to witness, in his office, in pri- 
vate conversation; Judge Bullitt and Mike 
Bright had given the same opinion to him 
before. Did not know that Mike Bright 
was a member of the order. Bright thought 
twenty thousand men could be raised in the 
State of Indiana to further insurrectionary 
movements, but that the State would not 
furnish more. This expressed opinion of 
Bright was an exception to that of the 
chiefs of the order, so far as witness had 
heard them express themselves. 

Pijier professed to have official orders, 
from Vallandigham, of a military character. 
Vallandigham had been represented to 
witness as the Supreme Grand Commander 
of the United States; elected on the 22d 
day of February, in New York. Under- 
stOOTi~frDill ■np'^r that Vallandigham had 
knowledge of this insuiTectionary move- 
ment, and had given his sanction to it; 
that he had supreme control of it, and the 
particular day for the rising was left to his 
discretion. Witness understood that Val- 
landigham knew of the action of the meet- 
ing at Chicago, and apj^roved of it. Heard 
Vallandigham speak at Hamilton, on the 
15th of June, but had no interview with 
him. 

In addition to the rituals, etc., there 
w-as the unwritten work of the order, 
which could not be gathered from the 
printed books. The unwritten work of 
the order w-as mainly confined to the 
third degree members. It consisted of 
signs, colloquies, etc., by which members 
make themselves known to each other, and 
gained admittance to lodges where they 
were not known. There were also instruc- 
tions as to the designs of the order, im- 
parted to members who were thought wor- 
thy of the three degrees, that were not 



considered suitable to be known to less re- 
liable members of the order. The printed 
works did not say any thing about the mili- 
tary character of the order, or about co-op- 
eration with the South, or resistance to the 
Government by force of arms; but to a 
third degi-ee member they gave that instruc- 
tion and information. To second degree 
members, who were considered worthy, 
they imparted the same instructions. First 
degree members were not considered wor- 
thy to receive these instructions. If they 
got them at all, it would be through the 
friends who were considered worthy. 

Did not know the relative proportion of 
first, second and third degree members. 
As a general rule, first degree members 
were more numerous than second degree 
members ; while second and third degree 
members were about equal. In Indianapo- 
lis township, the second and third degree 
members numbered only about sixty odd 
men ; but Mr. Harrison said one thousand 
or twelve hundred could be got into the 
order. They thought it advisable to take 
in only responsible men, who would influ- 
ence others to join when the proper time 
came. 

As to the available means of the order, in 
arms and ammunition. Dr. Bowles said he 
knew a man who would furnish any amount 
of arms and powder, at any time and place 
the order might designate. Did not know 
that the order had any storehouses, arsenals, 
or depots for arms, or that the members had 
arms beyond what citizens usually have. 
Did not know of any funds raised to pur- 
chase arms, though that question was dis- 
cussed at length at the meeting of the 
Council in this city, on the 14th of June. 

At that meeting, a committee of thirteen 
was appointed, to act for the Council in any 
emergency, during the recess of that body, 
and Avhose acts were to be as legal as though 
the Grand Council had passed them. 

Had not been under arrest. Witness' 
testimony was not given to save him from 
prosecution. Eesided now at Matoon, Illi- 
nois. Was raised in Kentucky, and had 
lived in difierent parts of the State ibr 
eleven years ; principally engaged in car- 
jjentering, and in the dry goods business. 
Had been in the army, in Comjjany E, 15th 
Kentucky ; but was detailed as clerk from 
the first. Left the army on the 14th of 
February, honorably discharged for disabil- 
ity. Went into the detective service on the 
5th of May. Applied for business generally, 
and was appointed to this particular duty. 

Never saw Bocking before meeting him 
at his room in the Louisville Hotel, when 
he explainedhis infernalmachines. Bowles. 
Kalfus and Miller were there, and others, 
who were members of the order. Had 
heard that Bocking had brought the coni- 
cal shell to the notice of the Government, 
but did not know that he had ofi'ered the 



32 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



spherical hand grenade. Dr. Bowles invited 
these members to Booking's room, to see 
whether these instruments could not be 
made available in carrying out the schemes 
of the order against the Government. 
Bowles said Bocking was a member of the 
order. The project of assisting the South 
was discussed that day in his room and in 
his presence, and Bocking said these shells, 
with the clock arrangement, and the Greek 
fire, were the very things that should be 
used, as I understood, for the destruction 
of Government property. Bowles further 
said, that he had tested Bocking well before 
they initiated him ; that he had been sent 
by the order to Canada, and made to spend 
his own money in experimenting and test- 
ing this thing for the benefit of the order. 
Bowles also said that he, Bullitt, Dodd, a 
chemist, and one or two others, had spent 
one Sunday in a basement in this city, ex- 
perimenting with the Greek fire, when peo- 
ple thought they were at church. 

Had been at Dr. Bowles' house three 
times. Had seen him once at Paoli, once 
at Louisville, and once in Indianapolis, at 
the meeting of the Council of the order. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Thursday, September 29, at 2 o'clock, 
P. M. 



CocKT KooM, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
September 2<J, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M.) 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

In consequence of the absence of a mem- 
ber, the Commission adjourned, to meet 
on Friday, September 30, at 8 o'clock, A. M. 



CotJET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, I 
September 30, 1864, 8 o'clock, A. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present; also the Judge 
Advocate, the accused, and his counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

The cross-examination of Felix G. Stidger, 
a witness for the Government, was then re- 
sumed. 

The witness, after replying to questions 
of counsel, relative to his particular occupa- 
tion, by whom employed, and places of 
abode, for the past eleven years, testified as 
follows : 

Introduced himself to D r. Bom l^s, and 
registered his name at French Lick S pri ngs, 
ab J. J. Grundy. Dr. Bowles "asKM'hlm if 
lie knew any thing about the Democratic 
organization in the State of Kentucky? 
Told Bowles that he did ; that he was a first 
degree member of it; on which Bowles told 
him that he was Military Chief of the order, 
and that a man by the name of Wright, of 
New York, was the Civil Chief He also gave 
witness the plans and designs of the Order 
of the Sons of Liberty up to that time. 



The Order of the Sons of Liberty was a 
continuation of the Order of American 
Knights, though all the members of the 
former were not, in all cases, deemed wor- 
thy to become members of the Sons of Lib- 
erty. Could not give the exact nature and 
extent dt the change, never having been a 
member of the Order of American Knights. 
Had been told by members that the Order 
of American Knights was changed to the 
Order of- Sons of Liberty, and that an addi- 
tion had been made to the colloquy of re- 
cognition between members of the order. 
The colloquy, " Resistance to tyrants is obe- 
dience to God," was said to have been added 
by Mr. Vallandigham, after the work had 
been revised by the committee in New 
York. Mr. Piper also said the ritual had 
been somewhat changed in other respects. 

In witness' conversation with Dr. Bowles, 
he gave a programme of the operations of 
the order. Illinois was pledged to forward 
fifty thousand men, to concentrate at St. 
Louis, and to co-operate with Missouri, 
which was pledged to furnish thirty thou- 
sand, and these combined forces were to 
co-operate with Price, who was to invade 
Missouri with twenty thousand, and more, 
if possible, by the assistance of Jeff Davis. 
These one hundred thousand men were to 
hold Missouri against any Federal forces 
that could be brought against them. In- 
diana was to furnish forty thousand to sixty 
thousand men, to co-operate with other 
forces that might come from Ohio, and all 
were to be thrown on Louisville, to co- 
operate with whatever force Jeff Davis 
might send into Eastern Kentucky, under 
Buckner or Breckinridge, as Davis might 
deem best. Dr. Bowles gave him this, in 
the first conversation, as the programme 
of the war at that time. 

On leaving Louisville, on the 26th of 
May, witness stopped at Salem, Indiana; 
registered his name at the Forsyth House 
as J. J. Grundy. Had a conversation with 
Mr. Heffren. First became acquainted with 
him on witness' first visit to Dr. Bowles. 
Heffren was formerly a Lieutenant Colonel 
of an Indiana regiment. Thought witness 
was a commissioner from some rebel forces 
in Kentucky. Heffren was looking for a 
commissioner, so he said, to tell him about 
some rebel regiments that had disbanded 
in Kentucky, after Forrest's raid and mas- 
sacre at Fort Pillow. 

Heffren told witness that he had been 
to Indianapolis a few days before, and 
had seen H. H. Dodd ; that they had con- 
sulted together about the time of calling 
a meeting of the Grand Council of the 
State, and that it would be between the 
15th and 17th of June. Told witness that 
he and Dodd were the only two men who- 
had the right of calling the members of 
the order together, and that it would num- 
ber between seventy-five and eighty thou- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



33 



eand men, and that the organization was 
about complete. 

"With this information witness went to 
Dr. Bowles a second time. He had been 
away from home, bvit no one appeared to 
know where. Bowles said, he had been at 
Indianapolis, and at a meeting there he 
had met some of the chiefs of Illinois. 
Judge Bullitt, of Kentucky; Barrett, of 
Missouri; and the heads of Indiana were 
there. Their occupation on Sunday, dur- 
ing the time they were here, was down in 
the basement of a building, testing their 
Greek fire. They had a chemist there 
whom Bowles said he had known for some 
time, and that now they had nearly brought 
this Greek fire to perfection. Bowles said 
that, at the meeting, Barrett pledged Mis- 
souri for thirty thousand men, and Illinois 
pledged fifty thousand to co-operate with 
Price, and Indiana would furnish forty 
thousand men. Before, he had said that 
Indiana would furnish more. 

Became acquainted with Judge Bullitt, 
from Dr. Bowles giving him a message to 
take. Saw Judge Bullitt about the 31st of 
May. The message was, that Mr. Hum- 
phreys was willing, to take a Brigadier Gen- 
eralship, and to remain in the rear. The ar- 
rangement had been talked of in Indian- 
apolis, and Bowles told witness to tell Bul- 
litt that it was satisfactory. Bullitt ap- 
proved, and went on to say, that he had 
spent a great deal of money in the affair, 
and that he was willing to spend every 
cent he had, but that he hoped soon to be 

able to steal a good living from the d d 

sons of b s. Witness gave his correct 

name to Judge Bullitt, while to Bowles he 
was still J. J. Grundy; they, however, 
seemed to understand each other in the 
matter. 

A conference respecting the murder of 
Coffin, was held on the 1st or 2d of June. 
Judge Bullitt, Mr. Piper, Chambers, of Gal- 
latin county, Tennessee, D. C. Phipps, of 
Louisville, Dr. Kalfus and witness, were 
present. Immediately after he was sc:!.l to 
Dr. Bowles, on which occasion he revealed 
his true name. The reason he gave for his 
assumed name was, that he had been 
■ watched by a United States Detective 
office!" — which was true — and that he 
changed his name to avoid being followfeci. 
The message witness took to Bowles wa-s 
that Coffin should be murdered, or, as he 
said, as he had been instrumental in get- 
ting him into the order, he ought to assist 
in getting him out. The message to Bowles 
about Coffin was verbal; it was not deemed 
prudent to commit such things to writing. 
Bowles told witness to tell Dodd, that he 
should set two men on Coffin's track, and 
that Dodd was to get him out of the way. 
Bowles did not say murder him; it was to 
get him out of the way, or make away with 
him. Witness then came to Indianapohs 
3 



and saw CoflBn; was introduced to him by 
Mr. James Prentice, a United States De- 
tective. Had sent word to Mr. Coffin pre- 
viously by Prentice, that he was to be mur- 
dered. 

Saw H. H. Dodd on the 5th of May. 
Had the conversation about the murder of 
Coffin. Dr. Gatling was in Dodd's office, 
but did not know that he heard the con- 
versation about Coffin. Dodd, in reply to 
the message from Bullitt an-d Bowles, said, 
if Coffin had betrayed the secrets of the or- 
der, he ought to be disposed of, or made 
way with. Witness stayed in Indianapolis 
all day, and went to Governor Morton's in 
the evening. The Governor understood 
his business. From there he went to Gen- 
eral Carrington's. 

Returned to Indianapolis on the 13th 
of June, at the instance of Dr. Bowles. 
Dodd also said, he would like witness 
to be present at the meeting of the Grand 
Council on the 14th. It was at that 
meeting that the murder of Coffin was dis- 
cussed. No vote was taken, but all present 
seemed unanimous. There was no dissent- 
ing voice, of the forty or fifty who were 
present. Dr. Gatling was present at the 
meeting. Dodd said he should go to Ham- 
ilton, and wanted to know who would go 
with him. McBride said, he was sorry 
that circumstances prevented his going. 
McBride was a heavy set man, rather 
fleshy, medium hight, probably about 
forty years of age. Dodd, Bowles and wit- 
ness went to Hamilton. Milligan was there, 
but did not know that he went on the same 
train. After Vallandigham had done speak- 
ing, witness went up to bid Dodd and 
Bowles good-by. They asked him if he 
had seen any thing of Coffin; witness said 
he did not know him, when they remem- 
bered that he had told them so before. 

Was in Indianapohs about a week after. 
Witness believed that was the time when we 
watched in Mr. Ristine's office for Coffin. 
Dodd took him there, and mentioned the 
circumstance about Coffin before Mr. Ristine. 
Dodd then took witness to young Ristine, 
and desired him to point out Coffin in the 
event of his passing the office. 

Q. Had Dodd explained to young Ristine 
the purpose for which he wanted you to 
sp'. Coffin? 

A. No, sir; he did not. 

Q. Then you do not know that young 
Ristine knew that you wanted to kill Coffin, 
if you saw him? 

A. No, sir; he did not. 

Question objected to by the Judge Ad- 
vocate, on the ground that the counsel for 
the accused was assuming as a fact what 
had not been asserted by the witness. 

Question and answer withdrawn by coun- 
sel for the accused. 

Q. Did you not pretend and assume to 
those men that you yourself would make 



34 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



way with Coffin, if a suitable opportunity 
occurred ? 

A. I do not know that I said any thing 
more than that I hoped to meet him under 
more favorable circumstances, not refei'ring 
in any way to what those circumstances 
might be, friendly or otherwise. 

Q. What impression did you intend to 
make upon their minds, by what you said ? 

A. I left them to draw their own infer- 
ence? 

Q. What was your avowed purpose in 
watching for him? 

A. To see him, because they wished me 
to see him, to know him when I saw him. 

Q. For what purpose ? 

A. I do not know, except it was their in- 
tention that I should kill him; but I do not 
know what their intention was. 

Q. Was not the drift of your actions and 
conduct that day to give these men the idea 
that you wished to kill hini ? 

A. I do not know what construction they 
put upon my conduct ? 

Q. Was it not your intention to mislead 
them into the belief that you wished to kill 
him ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

Q. Then young Ristine did not know that 
your intentions were hostile toward Coffin, 
did he ? 

A. No, sir, none of them knew that I had 
any hostile intentions toward Coffin at that 
time. 

Q. Had you done nothing to lead them 
to that conclusion ? 

A. Not that I know o£ 

Q. Then your intention, in sitting in the 
Auditor's office, so far as you had any inten- 
tion, or confided any intention, was lawful 
and legitimate ? 

A. It was. Simply to see Coffin and know 
him. 

Q. Then they, so far as you knew, under- 
stood that to be your intention ? 

The question was objected to by the Judge 
Advocate, and withdrawn. 

Q. You knew Coffin perfectly well at that 
time, did you not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. It was not, then, a bona fide intention to 
know Coffin that induced you to sit there? 

A. No, sir, for I knew him already. 

Q. What was your object in going there 
to see him? 

The Judge Advocate objected. I object 
to the question. The witness need not 
state what his object was, as that is not com- 
petent evidence. 

The counsel for the accused replied: I 
submit to the Court, that, while it is not 
strictly competent evidence, I desire that 
the witness state what his object was, and 
'eave its competency to be decided by the 
Jourt. 

The Judge Advocate replied : With that 



understanding, I have no objection to the 
question. 

Q. What was your object in going there 
to see him ? 

A. That they might have the satisfaction 
of pointing Coffin out to me. 

Q. Is Coffin still alive ? 

A. He was yesterday. 

Did not know why the uprising of the 
order did not take place on the 15th or 16th 
of August. He got the programme from 
Dodd, on the Tuesday following Bullitt's ar- 
rest, which was on Saturday. On Thursday 
of the same week he went to Dr. Bowles, 
who at first hesitated aboiit telling witness, 
but when he found that witness already 
knew of the contemplated uprising, he told 
him that they had agreed at Chicago to 
wait for the co-operation of the rebels, but 
after they came from Chicago, Dodd and 
others determined not to wait for their co- 
operation. Witness understood that Bowles 
had received a message from Dodd, an- 
nouncing that the military commanders of 
the order had had a meeting, and a change 
of the original programme had been de- 
cided on. On going to Dr. Bowles, witness 
met Dodd's son on hoi'seback, coming away. 
He was a boy of thirteen or fourteen years 
of age. Had seen the boy in Dodd's office, 
and heard him call Dodd father. Bowles 
told him the boy had been there. 

Bowles said he would call a meeting of 
the Grand Commanders and Major Gener- 
als in a few days. He would probably have 
them meet at his house, and he would give 
me the result of their deliberations after- 
ward. The uprising would take place or 
not, as the military chiefs determined. 
Bowles said he might consent to it at the 
appointed time, with the co-operation of the 
rebel Colonels Syphert, Jesse and Walker, 
who were then said to be in Kentucky. 

Did not know to what members of the 
order this insurrectionary scheme had been 
confided, but Dodd remarked to Harrison 
and witness, that he suspected the propriety 
of confiding the scheme to Dan. Voorhees. 
Hanii-on, too, thought it best not to com- 
municate it to Voorhees. Dodd replied, 
" You are the only two persons I communi- 
cate all my plans to." The knowledge of 
the insurrectionary scheme, witness knew, 
extended to the members of the Grand 
0-j"Qoil, but he believed the exact time de- 
termviied yn was confined to the Grand Com- 
mander and his Major Generals. Voorhees 
was not wholly confided in by Dodd, but he 
seemed to be in the confidence of the or- 
ganization, and they were perfectly free 
with him about it. 

Colonel Anderson, a rebel officer of the 
.3d Kentucky Cavalry, who was on parole in 
Louisville, and had given bond about the 
1st of July, was initiated as a member of 
the order by Dr. Kalfus. Kalfus gave him 
the vestibule and first degree, and witness 



TREASON TRIAJiS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



85 



gr.ve him the second and thh-d degrees, at 
the instance of Dr. Kalfus. Witness re- 
ported the fact to Colonel Farleigh, Com- 
mander of the Post at Louisville, and an 
order of banishment was issued, though it 
never reached Anderson, who left for Can- 
ada. Anderson said that had he received 
his order of banishment for breaking his 
parole, he would go to the Southern army 
again. 

Had some conversation with Dr. Bowles 
about the establishment of a North-western 
Confederacy. Bowles said that Republican 
leaders had told him that the Government 
would acknowledge the independence of 
the Southern Confederacy, provided they 
were certain that no attempt would be 
made to establish a North-western Confede- 
racy. 

The two gentlemen who went to see Bul- 
litt, on the Saturday afternoon, were A. 0. 
Brannan, and Dr. Bayliss; and Di". Kalfus 
and Mr. Thomas, the jailor, went to see him 
on Sunday morning. 

Had a conversation with Ristine and 
Dodd, in Ristine's office, about the letter 
from Dick Bright. They said the letter 
was addressed to all three of them. Dr. 
Chambers, of Warsaw, Gallatin county, said 
he had directed Jesse D. Bright to write 
that letter, but he supposed Jesse had di- 
rected Dick Bright to write it. Mr. Cham- 
bers was a member of the order. 

Piper said he had a communication fi-om 
Mr. Vallandigham to Dr. Bowles, which re- 
ferred to the release of rebel prisoners at 
Johnson's Island, as part of the insurrec- 
tionary programme. Captain Hines, a rebel 
officer, who was captured, imprisoned, and 
escaped with Morgan, was to have charge 
of the duty of releasing the prisoners at 
Johnson's Island. Piper told witness, while 
in Dr. Kalfus' office, at Louisville, that Cap- 
tain Hines was on Vallandigham' s staft* 

Dodd also told Judge Bullitt that he 
would get together the men he could, and 
undertake the release of the prisoners at 
Camp Morton, Indianapolis; and in the 
event of his not succeeding, he would make 
his escape. 

The counsel for the accused here objected 
to the witness' voluntary statements not 
asked for, and to his giving hearsay testi- 
mony. Counsel desired that the last state- 
ment of witness might be stricken from the 
record. 

The Judge Advocate, in reply, said, that 
a statement once upon the record could not 
be stricken from it. At the final delibera- 
tion, the Commission would determine what 
was evidence, and the reliability or other- 
wise of the witness' statements. 

The counsel for the accused assented to 
this view, and withdrew his objection. 

Witness, of his own knowledge, did not 
know that the Order of American Knights 
and the Order of the Sons of Liberty were 



the same order, but Dr. Kalfus, Harrison, 
Bowles, Piper, and other members of the 
order, had so informed him. Harrison had 
told witness that the Order of the Sons of 
Liberty had had four different names. 

The members of the order were sworn to 
obey the orders of their Commanders, irre- 
spective of the' orders or laws of the Gov- 
ernment. 

The attention of the witness was here 
called to the book, already in evidence, con 
taining the list of members of the order in 
Indianapolis; also the roll of rebel pris- 
oners. 

Witness first saw the book in Harrison's 
office. Harrison showed him the list of 
members of the order, but not the other 
names. 

The counsel for the accused objected to 
the introduction of the whole book in evi- 
dence. 

The Judge Advocate replied, that the 
book, as a whole, had been introduced in 
evidence, though the attention of the wit- 
ness had been called only to the names of 
the members of the order. It was for the 
Commission to determine what relation, if 
any, one list in the book bore to the other. 
There was nothing to preclude the whole 
book from being received in evidence by the 
Commission. 

The objection of the counsel was then 
withdrawn. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate : 

I wish you to state whether any thing has 
been said to you, on the part of the author- 
ities or by me in their behalf, of any prom- 
ises, or intention on the part of Government, 
to reward you for any testimony given by 
you before this Commission ? 

A. Not a word. 

Q. Did I, or did I not, expressly state, 
that the only way in which you could come 
as a witness before this Commission, was, to 
make a full, free and truthful statement of 
what had occurred, within your knowledge, 
in connection with this order ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Has there ever been any intimation, 
or hint, of any intention on the part of the 
Government, to waive any arrest, or pro- 
cess for arrest, as a reward for any thing you 
might say or do in this trial ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Will you state who it was that first re- 
vealed to you, or to the order, that Coffin 
was a detective ? 

A. Dr. Chambers. 

Q. Where did he first announce it? 

A. In Dr. Kalfus' office, in the city of 
Louisville. 

Q. Had he known Coffin before? 

A. He said he knew him previously. 

Q. Who were present when he spoke of 
Coffin as a detective ? 



36 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



A. Judge Bullitt, Piper, T. C. Wips, Kal- 
fus, and myself. 

Q. Was this Captain Hines, you mention 
as on Vallandigham's staft', appointed be- 
fore or after his capture? 

A. After bis escape from prison in Ohio. 

Q. Then it was after Hines' capture, im- 
prisonment, and escape, that he accepted a 
commission on Vallandigham's statt", and 
was assigned to the releasing of the prison- 
ers at Johnson's Island. 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You stated that this order has had 
four ditierent names. Did you learn them? 

A. I learned only the names, Order of 
American Knights and Sons of Liberty. 
Nothing was said to me about the Knights 
of the Golden Circle. 

Q. In your examination, I understood 
you to say that you had a conversation here 
with certain parties on the 5th or 6th of 
May. Did you mean to say May or June? 

A. June. I was not here in May, nor 
until the 5th of June. 

Q. I will now ask you, as it has been 
asked you on the part of the defense, 
whether there was not an unwritten work 
of the order, which contains or contem- 
plates a military organization, and also 
signs, grips, passwords, colloquies, and modes 
of recognition? 

A. There is. 

Q. You may now give to the Commission 
what you mean by the unwritten part of 
the work of the order. 

A. There are, in the unwritten work, cer- 
tain signs, grips and colloquies, used in the 
recognition and testing of members, as fol- 
lows: If you are a member of the Vesti- 
bule degree, and you meet a stranger whom 
you suppose to be a member of the order, 
you test him in the sign of the degree, 
thus: You place the heel of your right foot 
in the hollow of the left, with the right 
hand under the left arm, bringing the left 
hand under the right arm, thus folding the 
arms, and placing the four fingers of the left 
band over the right arm. The stranger, or 
person addressed, if a member of the order, 
will take the same position. That is as far 
as you go in public. You then retire to 
some place, where you will not be observed, 
and continue to test him. You advance 
your right foot, and he will advance his 
right loot to meet yours. The two then 
take an ordinary grip with the right hands, 
at the same time placing the left hand on 
the right breast, if you find him incorrect, 
you stop. If correct, you proceed with the 
following colloquy, which is given in altern- 
ate syllables by the parties, first the pass- 
word of the order for that degree, which is 
tlie word Calhoun spelled backward, tlius: 
" Nu — oh — lac" — "8. — L." — "Give me lib- 
erty — or give me death." Then you give 
one shake of the hand. [The dashes indi- 
cate that the syllables or phrases are altern- 



ately pronounced by the parties.] In this 
Vestibule degree there is also a signal of 
distress. This is given by placing the left 
hand on the right breast^ and raising the 
right hand and arm to their full hight once, 
if it is in the daj'-time. If at night, when 
that could not be seen, you give the word 
oak-oun three times, thus: " Oak-oun, oak- 
oun, oak-oun." Oak is the tree of the 
acorn, which is the symbolical emblem of 
the order, and " oun" is the last syllable of 
the password as it is usually pronounced. 
In the first degree, the same position of the 
feet and arms is taken, except that in place 
of four fingers over the right arm, the first 
two fingers are so placed, and they are sep- 
arated. This position, of the fingers is 
taught to have reference to the sovereignty 
of States. Tlie feet being in the same 
position as in the other degree, they are 
advanced as before mentioned. In taking 
the grip, each one runs his first finger upon 
the wrist of the other, taking the ordi- 
nary grip with the other three fingers, 
running the thumbs as nearly straight as 
possible. This grip is taught to be as near 
the shape of the acorn — the universal em- 
blem of the order — as can be made with 
the hand. The left hand is to be placed on 
the breast as before. The colloquy is re- 
peated thus : " If you go to the East— I will 
go to the West. Let there be no strife — 
between mine and thine — for we — be breth- 
ren — — S — L — Resistance to tyrants — is 
obedience to God." [All colloquies are pro- 
nounced alternately, as indicated by the 
dashes.] Great care is taken to say ''be 
brethren," the word " be" being a test of 
membership. The partof this colloquy, given 
after the initial "0. S. L.," is said to have been 
added by Mr. Vallandigham. when the work 
of the order was sent to him for revisal, 
after the committee at New York had fin- 
ished their part. This is the first temple 
degree. 

In the second degree, the hands are 
crossed on the abdomen, the right hand 
outside to represent the belt of Orion; the 
thumbs pointing upward, represent the 
point of the star Arcturus. The feet are 
placed and advanced as before. The collo- 
(juy is given thus: "What — a star — Arc — 
turns — what of the night — morning cometh 
— Will ye inquire — inquire ye — Return — • 
come — password of degree — Orion." This 
colloquy is taken mostly from the 11th and 
12th verses of the 21st chapter of Isaiah. 
The grip of this degree is the ordinary grip ; 
the thumbs of the joined hands pointing 
ui)ward, representing the point of the star 
Arcturus. 

Tlie sign of the third degree is given 
thus: the arms are crossed on the breast, 
with the fingers pointing to the shoulders, 
the right arm outside. This sign is said to 
represent the Southern cross, as seen in the 
heavens south of the equator. The feet are 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDLAFAPOLIS. 



37 



placed and advanced as before. The collo- 
quy is thus given: "Whence — Seii- — How — 
by the ford. Name it — Jaback. Thy pass- 
word — Washington — Bayard." Washington 
is the password of the degree. If as a 
stranger, and you visit any lodge, you give 
three knocks at tho dooi*. You then send 
in your name, residence, rank, and the 
temple where you belong. If you are 
known, you are admitted. If not, a com- 
mittee is sent out to examine you. They 
test you, and if they find you perfect in 
every particular, they admit you. If you 
fail in any respect, they know you no more. 
The grip is given by locking the thumbs 
crosswise, the palm of the hands being 
downward, and the hands being held hori- 
zontal. It is a grip of the thumbs alone. 

The sign of the Grand Councillor's de- 
gree is given by placing the right arm in the 
same position as in the third degree, the 
left hand being placed under the right 
«lbow. The feet are in the same position, 
and advanced as in the other degrees. You 
then take the ordinary grip with the right 
hand, and with the left hand you take hold 
of the right elbow of the person you are 
testing — he doing the same. You then 
come to the exact position of folding the 
arms in the Vestibule degree, with the arms 
folded; then each turns one-fourth around 
to the right, facing in opposite directions, 
when the colloquy is given thus: "Whence — 
America — North — South." America is the 
password of the Grand Councillor's degree. 

What I have gone through with, is part 
of the unwritten work of the order. There 
is a reference in the ritual to a passage of 
Scripture given in the initiation as part of 
the charge — Isaiah lix: 14-19. This pas- 
sage, as well as the "Invocation," are said 
to have been added to the ritual by Val- 
landigham. The passage reads : 

" And judgment is turned away back- 
ward, and justice standeth afar oft": for 
truth is fallen in the street, and equity can 
not enter. Yea, truth faileth; and he that 
•departeth from evil, maketh himself a 
prey; and the Lord saw it, and it dis- 
pleased Him that there was no judgment. 
And He saw that there was no man, and 
wondered that there was no intercessor; 
therefore His arm brought salvation unto 
Him; and His righteousness, it sustained 
Him. For He put on righteousness as a 
breast-plate, and a helmet of salvation upon 
His head; and He put on the garments of 
vengeance for clothing, and was clad with 
Keal as a cloak. According to their deeds, 
accordingly He will repay, fury to His ad- 
versaries, recompense to His enemies; to 
the islands. He will repay recompense. So 
shall they fear the name of the Lord from 
the west, and His glory from the rising of 
the sun. When the enemy shall come in 
like a Hood, the Spirit of the Lord shall liit 
up a standard against him." 



Q. Is this part of the instruction given in 
any book? 

A. The passwords, signs and colloquies 
are not given, but are communicated by 
members of the order, in instructing ini- 
tiates. This is the portion of the unwrit- 
ten work Colonel Anderson applied for, to 
be sent from Kentucky to him in Canada, 
in secret cypher. 

Q. Did I not understand you to say Judge 
Bullitt was searched at the time he was 
arrested? 

A. He was not searched in my presence. 
I understood he was searched afterward. 
When we were going to the cars he carriet 
a satchel with him, and handled it as 
though it was very heavy. He carried r*. 
with him wherever he went, and remark.- 
it was God damned heavy. Afterward I 
understood he had gold in it; that he had 
cashed one of his checks on Montreal, and 
that the other was found on his person 
when he was arrested. Dodd said that Bul- 
litt had two checks on his person, on Mon- 
treal, and that he hoped those who arrested 
him had not searched him, but had acted 
the gentleman with him. He hoped he had 
had an opportunity to destroy them, after 
taking the numbers, so that he might du- 
plicate them. 

George E. Pugh, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then inti'oduced ; and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testi- 
fied as follows: 

Question by the Judge Advocate. Ple'se 
to state to the Commission your name and 
place of residence. 

A. George Ellis Pugh. I reside in the 
city of Cincinnati, Ohio. 

Q. I will ask you whether you have hivd 
any knowledge of the existence of the 
Ord.-^r of American Knights or Order of 
the Sons of Liberty ? 

A. None, except what I have gathered 
from the newspapers. 

Q. Are you acquainted with t' c hand- 
writing of C. L. Vallandigham? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Please to look at thes'^ let* ^rb, an i state 
to the Commission whether they are his 
signatures, and whether they are in his 
handwriting? 

[The Judge Advocate here handed the 
witness four letters, one dated "Windsor, 
C. W., October 8, 1863," to "My dsar Vor- 
hees," and signed "C. L. Vail.;" another da- 
ted " Windsor, C. W., May 12, 1864," to " Dr. 
Sir," signed " C. L. V.;" another dat-<^d 
"May 31, 1864," to "H. H. Doda, Esq.," 
signed "C. L. Vail.;" the fourth dat<ed 
"Dayton, Ohio, June 28, 1864," with the ini- 
tials of the order, "0. S. L.," under the date, 
giving the letter an oflBcial character, as 
connected with the order, addressed to 
"Dr. Sir," and signed "S. C."] 

A. I believe they are all in nL handwri- 
ting. 



38 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



The Judge Advocate li.inded the witness 
a letter, dated "Windsor, C. W., 1st May, 
1S64, ' addressed to " H. H. Dodd, Esq.," and 
signed " Friend," and asked: 

Q. "Will you state whether that is Mr. 
Vallandigham's handwriting? 

A. It is not. 

The letter, dated "May 31, 1864," ad- 
dressed to "H. H. Dodd, Esq.," and signed 
'• C. L. Vail., ' was here introduced in evi- 
dence by the Judge Advocate. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the accused. Mr. Pugh, you 
have stated that these letters are in Mr. 
Vallandigham's handwriting. Will you 
state how you know his handwriting? 

A. I have had an intimate personal ac- 
quaintance with him; I have seen him write 
a great many letters, and have received a 
great many letters from him. 

TESTIMONY OP JOSEPH KIRKPATRICK. 

Joseph Kirkpatrick, a witness for the 
Government, was then introduced, and 
being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, 
testified as follows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate. State 
to the Commission your name, residence 
and business. 

A. My name is Joseph Kirkpatrick. I 
reside in the city of New York, where I 
have lived since 1858. I am a merchant, 
and have dealt in fire-arms for the last 
three years. 

Q. State if any arms were sold by you in 
New York city, to a party purporting to be 
Mr. Parsons, of Indianapolis? If so, state 
what they were, and describe them ? 

A. I sold two hundred and ninety pistols 
to a man in New York, who represented 
himself not as Parsons, but as L. Harris. 

Q. Did you make any contract to sell him 
other arms? 

A. I made a contract to sell him about 
two thousand five hundred revolvers. 

A. Any ammunition ? 

A. Yes, sir; one hundred and thirty -five 
thousand pistol cartridges. 

Q. Have you seen these arms since your 
arrival in this city? If so, state where? 

A. I saw them at the Arsenal, near this 
city. 

Q. How were they boxed? 

A. In the same boxes in which they were 
packed in New York, and they are the 
same arms. 

Q. How were the boxes marked? 

A. They were marked "J. J. Parsons, In- 
dianapolis, Ind. ' 

Q. Had you any directions about the 
marking of these boxes, at the time they 
were sliipped from New York ? 

A. I had nothing to do with marking the 
boxes. Harris marked them himself in 
my presence, "J. J. Parsons Indianapolis, 



Ind." but did not state any reasouc for 
marking them thus. 

Q. Did he state that his name was Par- 
sons? 

A. He did not. 

Q. Was youv attention called to the mark- 
ing of the boxc..., by any thing said about 
charges on the armn? 

A. No, sir. He paid for the arms at the 
time. 

Q. Did you learn from the conversation 
at the time of purchase, where the arms 
were to be shipped to? 

A. He spoke of the shipment of arms to 
California, and to Mexico, and said that the 
Government seemed to be very willing to 
permit arms to be shipped to California, 
and thence to Mexico, if their attention 
was not called especially to it. 

Q. Did you infer from that, that they 
were to be shipped to the California market? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many revolvers did he ship 
then? 

A. Two hundred and ninety. He paid for 
them at the time. 

Q. How many more did he contract for? 

A. About two thousand five hundred re- 
volvers. 

Q. How many rounds of ammunition 
were pvirchased ? 

A. Thirty-five thousand rounds to fit the 
same pistols, which were shipped at the 
same time. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the accused. Do you say 
that the arms found in the boxes in this 
city, marked ''J. J. Parsons," are the same 
you sold to Harris? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you know Harris before the pur- 
chase ? 

A. I never saw him before, nor have I 
seen him since. 

Q. What was his personal appearance? 

A. He had a full form; was about six feet 
high; quite a large man; weighed about 
two hundred pounds, and had heavy black 
whiskers. 

Q. Was there any other per.son with him? 

A. Once, when he called on me, quite a 
tall young man, whom he introduced as 
liis brother, came with him, and he said if 
ne did not call again himself, this young 
man would represent him. 

Q. When did he pay for the arms? 

A. He paid for the first order when they 
were shipped. He said in a few days he 
would pay lor the others and give shipping 
directions. 

Q. Did any person call on you afterward, 
about the arms contracted for? 

A. No, sir. 

The coun.sel here directed the attention 
of the witness to the accused, H. H. Dodd, 
and asked: 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



39 



Q. Was the accused at your place of bu- 
siness at any time with this party, or alone, 
in connection with the purchase of arms? 

A. I never saw him tliere at alL 

Q. You only inferred then, that these arms 
were to be shipped to Mexico, on account 
of the willingness of the Government? 

A. That was my inference frona what Mr. 
Harris said. 

Q. In what part of the city is your place 
oi' business? 

A. No. 1 Park Place. 

(^. What is the name of your firm ? 

A. Joseph Kirkpatrick. I have no part- 
ner. 

RE-EXA.MINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate. In the 
statement Harris made to you about the 
willingness of the Government to permit 
shipments of arms to Mexico, if their at- 
tention was not called directly to it, you 
inferred that these arms were to be so 
shipped? 

A. That was the inference, or the conclu- 
sion I arrived at, and I think what he stated 
involved that inference. 

The Commission then adjourned to 2 
o'clock, P. M. 

AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, l 
September 30, 186-1, 2 o'clock, P. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present ; also the Judge 
Advocate, the accused, and his counsel. 

TESTIMONY OF WM. CLAYTON. 

Wm. Clayton, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, was then introduced, and being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
fellows: 

Question by the Judge Advocate. State 
your name, residence and occupation. 

A. Wm. Clayton. I reside in Roseville 
township, Warren county, Illinois, where I 
have lived since the fall of 1841. I am a 
farmer. 

Q. Have you ever been admitted to the 
lodges of a certain order known as the Or- 
der of American Knights, or Order of the 
Sons of Liberty; and if so, are you a mem- 
ber of such an organization? 

A. I suppose I am. 

Q. Have you been admitted as a member 
of this organization? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Into how many degrees? 

A. Three. 

Q. Have you now or ever been employed 
in any way as a detective for the Govern- 
ment? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you join this order, and continue 
a member of It, in good faith ? 

A. I did, rir. 



Q. Have you volunteered to give evidence 
in this matter? 

A. The first I knew of it was when an 
officer came after me to attend this Court. 

Q. State when you were first admitted to 
the Order of American Knights, and where. 

A. I think it was about the 1st of July, 
1863, I was initiated in the congregation 
formed in the timber at a place called 
Pearce's Grove, WaiTen county, by a man 
by the name of Griffith, and by a Dr. 
McCartney. They resided at Monmouth, 
Illinois. 

Q. Can you give to this Commission the 
obligation you took upon yourself? 

A. I could not repeat it by heart. 

Q. Can you remember the substance of 
that obligation? 

A. I remember some of it; it was in print. 

Q. Have you a copy of the ritual or obli- 
gation about you? 

A. [After a pause.] Yes, sir. 

The witness here produced a pamphlet 
from his pocket, which he handed to the 
Judge Advocate. 

Q. What does this capital letter V., on 
the title, mean? 

A. I don't like to tell, sir. 

Q. But you must tell this Commission, 
sir? 

A. "Vestibule," sir, I suppose. 

The pamphlet or ritual referred to, was 
then introduced in evidence by the Judge 
Advocate. 

Q. Turn to the obligation or oath taken 
by those initiated into the order. 

A. It is on page 7. 

The obligation was here read to the 
Court by the Judge Advocate, and is as fol- 
lows? 

I , in the presence of God, and many 

witnesses, do solemnly declare that I do 
herein freely, and in the light of a good 
conscience, renew the solemn vows which I 
plighted in the V . I do further prom- 
ise that I will never reveal nor make known 
to any man, woman or child, any thing 
which my eyes may behold, or any word 
which my ears may hear within this sacred 

T [temple], or in any other T , nor 

in any other place where the brotherhood 
may be assembled. That I will never speajc 
of, nor intimate, any purpose or purposes of 
this order, whether contemplated or deter- 
mined, to any one, except to a brother of 
this order, whom I know to be such. That 
I will never exhibit any or either of the 
emblems or insignia of the order, except by 
express authority granted to that end, and 
that I will never explain their use or signi- 
fication to any one not a brother of this or- 
der, whom I know to be such, under any 
pretense whatsoever, neither by persuasion 
nor by coercion. That I will never reveal 
nor make known to any man, woman or 
child, any or either of the signs, hails, pass- 
words, watchwords, initials, nor initial let* 



40 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



ters, belonging to this order, neither by 
voice nor by gesture, attitude, or motion of 
the body, nor any member of the body ; nor 
by intimation through the instrumentality 
of any thing animate or inanimate, or ob- 
ject in the heavens or on the earth, or 
above the earth, except to prove a man if 
he be a brother, or to communicate with a 
brother whom I shall have first duly proved 
or know to be such. That I will never pro- 
nounce the name of this order, in the hear- 
ing of any man, woman or child, except to 
a brother of this order, whom I know to be 
such. I do further promise that I will ever 
have in most holy keeping, each and every 
secret of this order, which may be confided 
to me by a brother, either within or with- 
out the T , and rather than reveal which, 

I will consent to any sacrifice, even unto 
death by torture. I do further promise that I 
will never recommend for membership of 
this order, any man who is not a citizen of 
an American State, except by dispensation 
to that end, by the competent authority of 
the order — citizenship always resulting from 
nativity, or from due process of law in such 
case provided — neither any person who has 
not attained the age of twenty-one years, 
neither a man unsound or infirm in body or 
in mind — such as a cripple or an idiot; 
neither any one of African descent, whether 
slave or free man ; neither an avowed and 
acknowledged atheist; neither a person of 
bad repute. I do further promise that I 
will ever cherish toward each, and every 
member of this order, fraternal regard and 
fellowship; that I will ever aid a worthy 
brother, in distress, if in my power to do so; 
that I will never do wrong, knowingly, to a 
brother, nor permit him to suffer wrong at 
the hand of another, if it shall be in my 
power to warn him of danger, or prevent 
the wrong. I do further promise that I 
will, at all times, if need be, take up arms 
in the cause of the oppressed — in viy country 
first of all — against any monarch, prince, 
potentate, power or government usurped, 
which may be found in arms and waging 
war against a people, or peoples, who are 
endeavoring to establish, or have inaugu- 
rated, a government for themselves, of their 
own free choice, in accordance with, and 
founded upon, the eternal principles of TVuth ! 

which I have first sworn in the V , and 

now in this presence do swear to maintain 
inviolate, and defend with my life. This I 
do promise, without reservation or evasion 
of mind, without regard to the name, sta- 
tion, condition, or designation of the invad- 
ing or coercing power, whether it shall arise 
within or come from without! 1 do further 
promise that I will always recognize and re- 
spond to the hail of a brother, when it shall 
be made in accordance with the instruc- 
tions and injunctions of this order, and not 
otherwise. I do further promise that, with 
God's help, 1 will ever demean myself 



toward my fellow men, and especially 
toward the brotherhood, as becometh a true 
man. I do further jaromise that, should J 
cease to be a member of this order, either 
of my own volition, or by expulsion, I will 
hold and preserve inviolate my solemn 
vows and pr-omises herein declared, as well 
as while I am in full fellowship. All this I 
do solemnly promise and swear sacredly to 
observe, perform, and keep, with a full 
knowledge and understanding, and with 
my full assent, that the penalty which will 
follow a violation of any, or either, of these 
my solemn vows will be a sudden and shameful 
death ! while my name shall be consigned" to 
infamy, while this sublime order shall sur- 
vive the wrecks of time, and even until the 
last faithful brother shall have passed from 
earth to his service in the Temiile not made 
with hands! Divine Essence! and ye men 
of earth ! witness the sincerity of my soul 
touching these my vows ! Help me, God ! 
Amen! Amen! Amen! 

Q. Was this the obligation of the mem- 
bers of the Order of American Knights? 

A. Yes, sir ; of the first degree. I took 
the second degree some time during the 
fall or winter, and the third degree in the 
spring of 1864, I believe. 

Q. What was the name of the or "er into 
which you were initiated ? 

A. I took one degree in the Order of 
American Knights, and also the second de- 
gree, and before I took the third degree it 
was changed to the Order of the Sons of 
Liberty. 

Q. When and by whom was that change 
made? 

A. I was informed by the oflficerc of the 
order that the change was made in New 
York, about the 22d of last February. 

Q. Did you learn at whose instigation the 
change was made ? 

A. The ancient brother of the Grand 
Temple stated to me, that it was made by 
Mr. Vallandigham, or in consequence of a 
suggestion from him. 

Q. Were you then initiated into the Or- 
der of the Sons of Liberty? 

A. Only into the third degree. The other 
vows in the Order of American Knights 
were considered binding in the Order of the 
Sons of Liberty. 

Q. Did all these members who belonged 
to the Order of American Knights, become 
members of the Order of Sons of Liberty, 
by virtue of taking the obligations of the 
former order? 

A. Yes, sir. All who had taken the third 
degree. They moved right along with the 
same officers, and were controlled by the 
same orders. 

Q. When did you take the third degree 
and become a member of the Sons of Lib- 
erty ? 

A. It was in the spring ; about March. 

Q. Have you continued, up to the time of 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



41 



receiving the summons to attend this Com- 
mission, to be a member of good standing? 

A. Yes, sir, I am so considered. I have 
never been expelled. 

Q. When and where did you meet ? 

A. We had a tolerably poor temple ; we 
met in the woods generally ; we had meet- 
ings once a month. 

Q. When did you last meet with them? 

A. I guess it was two weeks ago to-mor- 
row. 

Q. What meeting was that? 

A. It was a meeting of the township tem- 
ple. 

Q. i/id you ever meet in the Grand Coun- 
cil? 

A. I never did. 

Q. Did you ever hold any office in the or- 
ganization ? 

A. I was lecturer of the Vestibule. 

Q. What was the general 2^1'inciple and 
aim of the organization ? 

A. In the first place it was organized — at 
least it was so reported to us — for the pur- 
' pose of bringing the Democratic party to- 
gether, shoulder to shoulder, so that, by such 
an organization, they might defeat the other 
party, if possible. It was at first reported 
to be a political organization. Afterward 
we were informed by the officers, that it 
was a military organization. 

Q. What service were they going to per- 
form? 

A. They mentioned a great many differ- 
ent purposes — one of them was that the 
authorities who have control of our Gov- 
ernment were tyrannical; that we were 
being trampled under foot; and that we 
should have to stand in defense of our 
rights. 

Q. Was it in contemplation to resist the 
Government authorities? 

A. No time was set to my knowledge. 

Q. Was it talked of? 

A. It was reported frequently by the offi- 
cers, that if they did not work right, when 
we got regularly organized, that there would 
be a time set to rise, and maintain our 
rights. 

Q. What was the plan? 

A. I can not say that the plan was ever 
developed to me; but so far as it was devel- 
oped, and I understood it, it was, that force 
of arms was to be resorted to, and that we 
should have to fight for our rights. 

Q. Did not these "rights" contemplate 
the overthrow of the Government by force 
of arms? 

A. I would rather consider it that way. 

Q. Did the order have any di'illiug? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ever drill ? 

A. Frequently, sir. 

Q. How often? 

A. I could not state the number of times. 

Q. How many times in a month did they 
drill? 



A. Sometimes once, sometimes twice a 
month. 

Q. How long is it since you commenced 
to drill ? 

A. About a year ago, in June. We have 
been drilling on and off for a year. 

Q. Did you get pretty well drilled ? 

A. Pretty well, sir; but we had no great 
drill master. 

Q. To what extent was this organization 
that you belonged to armed ? 

A. I could not tell exactly. Most of the 
arms we had were pistols. 

Q. In your township, to what extent were 
the members of the organization armed? 

A. 1 guess about two-thirds were armed? 

Q. Is that a fair average of the arming of 
the organization, as far as you know? 

A. I think it is, sir. 

Q. How many members were there in 
your township? 

A. The muster roll numbered one hun- 
dred and odd. Two-thirds of that number 
were armed with revolvers, shot-guns or 
rifles. 

Q. Do you know how extensive the or- 
ganization in Illinois was? 

A. I could only learn through the officers 
of the Grand Lodge, in their returns to the 
Grand Council, and according to their re- \ 
ports it was over one hundred thousand in \ 
that State. 

Q. Did you learn how many could be re- 
lied upon, in a military point of view, in 
case of insurrection? 

A. Mr. McCartney, who was the Grand 
Seignior, informed me that there were forty 
thousand in the State well armed, and 
they could depend upon eighty thousand 
in the State of Illinois. 

Q. Did you learn the strength of the or- 
ganization in the State of Indiana? 

A. I learned from the reports of officers 
of our temple, that they were about eighty 
thousand in the State of Indiana, but I did 
not learn how many were armed here ? 

Q. Did you learn the strength of the or- 
der in Missouri ? 

A. That there were between thirty and 
forty thousand. Twenty thousand of them 
were in St. Louis and the vicinity. 

Q. Did you ever hear of any plans, or dis- 
cussions of any plans, among members of 
the order, or of the officers, to assist the 
rebels in case of the invasion of Missouri, 
or of assisting them by moving into Ken- 
tucky? 

A. I heard some talk of that kind. We 
were informed in the vicinity where I live, 
that sometime between May and June, 
probably, that there was to be an invasion 
at three different points. One was to be 
into Ohio, one into Indiana, and another into 
Illinois. 

Q. By whom? 

A. If I mistake not. Forrest was to lead 
the one in Illinois ; Wheeler or Morgan, or 



42 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



some of those men, in Indiana; Longstreet 
was to make for Ohio while Marmaduke or 
Price (some said one and some another) was 
to come into Missouri. It was early in the 
spring that this news reached us. i 

Q. "Was it in contemplation that the or- 
der should rise and assist these men, when 
they invaded these States? 

A. I think the understanding was that 
in case the rebels came over into Illinois, 
they and the brethren of this organization 
were to shake hands and be friends. 

Q. Were they to receive aid and assist- 
ance from this order ? 

A. I should consider it that way, sir. 

Q. Do you know of any assessments upon 
this order for money, with which arms were 
to be purchased for the organization? 

A. I do not know of any assessments 
made by the Grand Council; but I know an 
assessment was made by the temples. An 
assessment was to be made by all the county 
temples, and an assessment was made by 
our lodge to the amount of $200. 

Q. Was it paid ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know what was done with the 
money? 

A. A man who passed by the name of J. 
A. Barrett, or Colonel Barrett, of St. Louis, 
was appointed to receive the money. He 
stated that he was traveling round through 
the State to receive money to pay transpor- 
tation on the arms that were engaged for 
the order. 

y. What arms were engaged for the or- 
der, and where were they to come from? 

A. The arms were to come from Nassau 
to Canada, and the understanding was that 
they were to be brought to the line in 
Canada by the authorities of the Confeder- 
ate States, and we were to pay the cost of 
transportation on them from Nassau to 
that point, where we were to receive them. 
If we got them home, it would be all right, 
and if we lost them, we were to lose what 
we had advanced. 

Q. Do you know any thing of an arrange- 
ment, in which Mr. Vallandigham was to 
give the signal for the rising of this order? 

A. I heard in this way, that all the or- 
ders would be issued from the Head De- 
partment, of which he was Supreme Com- 
mander, and that orders would be issued 
when all things were ready; in other words, 
we were not to do any thing till the com- 
mand was given by Vallandigham, who was 
Supreme Commander. The next highest 
in command was a man by the 'name of 
Holloway. In case the command was not 
given by Vallandigham, the word would be 
given by Holloway. He lives in Mercer 
county, Illinois, and I have often talked 
with him. 

Q. Did you ever talk to him respecting 
the order? 

A. 1 talked in regard to the movements 



of the order with Mr. Griffith. The sub- 
stance of it was that I had my doubts in 
regard to the order being able to stand up 
and maintain what they wero undertaking. 
He did not seem to have any doubt about 
being able to gain their point — that is, as 
to whether they would be successful or 
not. 

Q. Was this order both civil and mili- 
tary? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Had you captains, colonels and gen- 
erals in your organization ? 

A. Only captains and colonels that I 
knew of. There was an act passed, that 
there should be a colonel to each county, 
and a brigadier general for each Congress- 
ional district. That act was passed by the 
Grand Council of the State: the^ made the 
laws for the order. 

Q. What did you understand we.'e to be 
the penalties for divulging the secrets of 
the order? 

A. The obligation there says death^ and 
that was understood to be the penalty. 

Q, Did you ever know any person who 
divulged, or who was reported to have di- 
vulged the secrets of the order? 

A. I do not know of any myself, but 
there were some who were said to have di- 
vulged them. 

Q. What was done in the matter? 

A. They probably decided that it was a 
compulsory move, and they did not attempt 
to do any thing. I heard that there were 
a number who had joined the order ar- 
rested at Richmond, Indiana, on their way 
to Ohio, and that the Provost Marshal, or 
some Government officer, got the secret:-, 
out of two of them, but it was claimed that 
force of arms had been used and weapons 
drawn upon them, and they concluded that 
they had to tell. 

Q. Were any inquiries made into the 
matter, or any court convened? 

A. I do not know that they convened 
a court, or that any inquiries were made by 
the order to find out the particulars, but it 
was vmderstood that if a man was guilty 
of exposing the secrets of the order, he 
would be tried by court-martial, and if 
found guilty he would pay the penalty. 

Q. Do you know of any court-martial 
being held? 

A. No, sir. But if they foun ^ a mar. 
guilty of betraying the secrets of the ordei , 
if the court decided that he should sutler 
death, they were to be governed by that 
entirely. 

Q. Do you know of this order having any 
connection or conimunication with the 
rebel authorities? 

A. I saw a man from their country, and I 
heard from members of the order, as well 
as outside the order, that h". belonged to 
the rebel government. 

Q. What did they come there for? 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



43 



A. I CO aid not ijositively state their busi- 
ness. But there were many who came over 
backward and forward from Missouri, whom 
I Saw, living as I did near the Missouri line, 
and many that came over, I guess, had been 
in the rebel army. 

Q. Was there any communication be- 
tween these men and the members of the 
order? 

A. Yes, s-.r. 

Q. Did the members or officers of your 
organization learn of the contemplated 
rebel movements from these people who 
crossed from Missouri? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And did events turn out as your order 
had been informed? 

A I believe they did. They were in- 
formed that Price would invade Missouri. 

Q. Prior to his coming, were the mem- 
bers of the order informed of his coming? 

A. I was informed by members from 
Henderson county that he was coming. 
A person, who professed to be one of 
Quantrell's men, I think, informed them 
ihat Price would be in Missouri toward the 
first of October, and remain there till after 
the fall election, or as much longer as he 
deemed proper, or as he could. 

Q. Was any effort made on the part of 
these emissaries to organize and assist the 
rebels when they should come into the 
State, as you have detailed? 

A. I think not, sir. 

Q. Was it not part of their general plan 
to assist the rebels, whenever they invaded 
these States? 

A. Yes, sir, and if it has been given up I 
do not know it. 

Q. I'll en why did they not assist Price 
when he came into Missouri? 

A. I can not tell; but the order is not 
doing much business in that State of late, 
from the exx)Osures made in this State. 

Q. Had the exposures in St. Louis any 
thing to do in stopping the operations of 
the order in Missouri and Illinois? 

A. I think, sir, it had a great deal. 

Q. Are they still keeping up their or- 
ganizations, notwithstanding these expo- 
sures? 

A. The military organization remains the 
eame, but they have not drilled any since. 

Q. How do these men that come from the 
South cross the river to get into Illinois? 

A. I have been informed by men who had 
lived in that State, that they had crossed at 
<litferent points. One point was near Lou- 
isiana, Missouri. 

Q. How do they cross? 

A. They told me that when they wanted 
to cross, and they could not hook a skiff, 
that they had oil-cloth so fixed, that by 
cutting willows and running poles into them, 
they could soon fix up a skiff. When they 
crossed, they would hide the oil-cloth till 
they wanted to return. 



Q. Did you ever belong to the Order of 
the Knights of the Golden Circle? 

A. Yes, sir, I did. 

Q. When did you join that order? 

A. I joined that before this Order of the 
Sons of Liberty. It was in 1862, I guess. 

Q. Where did you join that order? 

A. In Jefferson county. I was down 
there on a visit, and I heard a great deal 
of talk about it, and a gentleman proposed 
to give me the organization to bring up 
home and start it, but I did not. 

Q. Was the Order of the Sons of Liberty, 
or Order of the American Knights, a con- 
tinuation of the OrdeV of the Knights of 
the Golden Circle? 

A. I never understood that it was so. 
The Order of American Knights was intro- 
duced in our county in June, 1863. It was 
at the time of the mass meeting of the 
Democratic convention at Springfield, Illi- 
nois, that it was inaugurated at that place. 
The Grand Council was inaugurated there, 
and the Grand Council appointed two offi- 
cers to each county to promulgate the order, 
and to set up temples. P. C. Wright, who 
now, I believe, has an interest in the New 
York News, inaugurated the ord-er. 

A lithographed circular was here pro- 
duced by the witness. 

Q. Where did you get this circular? 

A. It was first showed to me by Dr. 
McCartney, in our temple, some time last 
winter. 

The circular, signed P. C. Wright, was 
here introduced into evidence by the Judge 
Advocate. It reads as follows: 

New York Daily News, ") 

OfBce, 19 City Hall Square, V 

New York, January 18, 1864.J 

Dear Sir: I have this day connected mj"^- 
self with the editorial department of the 
" New York Neivs." You will remember ^^ 
that the News has, from the first, advocated 
the principles inculcated by Jefferson and 
his illustrious compeers, and has fearlessly 
and openly denounced the usurpations of 
power which have wrested from the citizen 
his cherished rights, and thrown down the 
last barrier between him and irresponsible 
despotism. 

The News will be our especial organ, and 
will be a medium for the interchange of 
sentiments and opinions of the friends of 
peace, touching the momentous concerns 
involved in the existing crisis. 

I entreat your kind offices and influence 
in extending the circulation of the News 
throughout the entire field of our labor. 
Yours sincerely, P. C. AV right. 

Q. Who was McCartney? 

A. He was the Grand Seignior in the 
county temple. 

Q. Do you know P. C. Wright, and what 
part he took in organizing the Order of 
American Knights? 

A. He organized the first Grand Council 



44 



TREASOX TRIALS AT LS'DIANAPOLIS. 



at Springfield, and he ai^pointed Grand 
Seignior and Ancient Brethren to organize 
the counties. It was the same P. C. Wright, 
so Dr. McCartney repre.sented, who is now 
connected with the !New York JW'ivs. 

Q. Can you give to this Comniission the 
unwritten part of the order up to the third 
degree ? 

A. I suppose I could, but I do not like to 
undertake it. 

Q. What is the password between the 
membei"s ? 

A. Each county has its own passwords. 
The password of our county was Wash- 
ington. 

Q. How was it given, by syllables or oth- 
erwise? 

A. It was spoken right out. 

Q. How did you recognize each other on 
the street? 

A. We would generally challenge him, 
that is by placing myself in a proper jjosition! 

Q. Give to this Commission the position 
by which you challenged a member. 

The witness here gave some of the chal- 
lenges and tests described at length by 
the witness Stidger. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Monday, October 3, at 2 o'clock, P. M. 

CouET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, "I 
October 3, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

In consequence of the absence of a mem- 
ber, the Commission adjourned, to meet 
on Tuesday, October 4, at 10 o'clock, A. M. 

CouKT KooM, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
October 4, 1864, 10 o'clock, A. M.i 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

Present — -Brevet Brigadier General Silas 
Colgrove, Colonel McLean, Colonel Thomas 
J. Lucas, Colonel John T. Wilder, Colonel 
Charles D. Murray, Colonel Richard P. De 
Hart, Major H. L. Burnett, Judge Advocate; 
also the accused and his counsel. 

Absent — Colonel Benjamin Spooner, Col- 
onel Ambrose A. Stevens. 

The Judge Advocate then read a medical 
certificate, excusing Colonel A. A. Stevens 
from attendance on the Commi.ssion. Also, 
a telegram from Colonel Spooner, stating 
his inability to be present at the Commis- 
sion; both of which were ordered to be 
attached to the record. 

By consent of the accused, given in oj^en 
Court, it was agreed that the record of pro- 
ceedings should be read, and any nominal 
business transacted, and that the absent 
members should take their seats on the 
Commission when they arrived. 

The proceedings of Friday, September 
30, were read. 

Pending the reading of the record, the 
Commission adjourned, to meet at 2 J o clock, 

r. M. 



AFTERNOON SESaiON 

COUKT KoOM, INDIANAP'JI.18, It<DIANA \ 

October 4, 1864, 2>o o'clock, P. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

The same members present as at the 
morning session ; also the Judge Advocate, 
the accused, and his counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

Tlie Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Wednesday, October 5. at 10 o'clock, 
A. M. 



CovBT Boom, Indi.vnapolis, Ini^iana, 1 
October 6, 18ti4, 10 o'clock, A. 51. J 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present: also the Judge 
Advocate, the accused, and his counsel 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

William Clayton, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, continued his testimony as fol- 
lows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate. State 
whether or not the league to which you be- 
longed, sent delegates to the Chicago Con- 
vention, or to the Chicago Grand Council, 
that met in that city in July last. 

A. The temple to which I belonged was 
subordinate to the countj"- temple. 1 be- 
longed to the organization in Eoseville 
township. The W^arren county temple sent 
delegates to the Grand Council for the 
State of Illinois. 

Q. Did you learn any thing of the doings 
or designs of the Grand Council, or the re- 
turn of the delegates? 

A. Not a great deal. I was at the War- 
ren county temple at Monmouth, and Mr. 
Griffith and McCarthy, who were officers 
of that temple, had been to the Chicago 
Grand Council. They spoke of the Mili- 
tary Committee. The Grand Commander 
of the State, they said, had the selecting 
and appointing of the Military Committee 
in the State. That committee was not 
known to any person whatever, except to 
the Grand Commander. 

Q. Did you learn what that was? 

A. No, sir; I did not. The committee 
reported to the Grand Commander all their 
proceedings, and such a part as he thought 
proper he reported to the Grand Council. 

Q. Did you, after the Chicago Conven- 
tion, hear any thing about the obligation of 
secrecy being removed? 

A. No, sir, I did not ; I never heard any 
thing of it till I saw it in the newspa- 
pers.* 

Q. Was that the first time you, as a mem- 
ber of the order, heard of the obligation 
of secrecy being removed? 

A. It was. 



* The Indiaiir.j)olin-.S«niifi<i' had atated,* few days ; revl- 
0U8, tlmt tlu- obligtttioii of gecrecj was removed dnrisg 
the sessiou of the Graad Couucil, at Chicaifo 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



45 



CROSS-EXAMIXATIOX. 

Was initiated a member of the Order of 
American Knights on the 17th day of 
June, 1863. The first knowledge witness 
had of the order, was at the time of the 
meeting of the Grand Council, at Spring- 
jfield, Illinois. It was organized at the mass 
convention, at which he was present. Mr. 
Griffith and Mr. McCartney were appointed 
to organize the county temple. The town- 
ship temple was organized shortly after. It 
was organized in the timber, about two and 
a half miles from his residence; about 
thirty, or more, were present at the first 
meeting. There was no drilHng at the first 
meeting, but was not positive but that 
there was some drilling before the organi- 
zation of the order; such drilling as there 
might have been, was not under the laws 
of the State of Illinois. The only object 
in drilling, witness knew of, was that the 
knowledge acquired was to be used for any 
thing that might come up. They had been 
informed that the Government was resort- 
ing to tyrannical measures, and there might 
probably come a time when they would 
have to stand in defense of their rights. 
They were afraid the Government might 
crowd them, and there had been talk of 
conscription, and they were arming, organi- 
zing, and drilling, to resist the conscription, 
or any thing else that jjushed them too 
hard. The company to which witness be- 
longed, numbered one hundred and up- 
ward. They generally carried their arms 
to drill. One of their drill masters was 
William F. George. He lived in Roseville 
township, Wai'ren county. There were 
also one or two men, officers, who were 
present at one or two drills. One was a 
cajstain, and the other a colonel. The col- 
onel was said to live in Knox county, 
near Augusta. They had been in the army, 
but were discharged. Supposed they were 
loyal. Four or five companies were present 
at the drill, which took place in an open 
prairie bottom. They did not become very 
well drilled. Witness was a private, and 
Mr. Johnson or Mr. Riggs was first lieu- 
tenant. 

Did not know, of his own knowledge, 
that the purpose of the organization of the 
order in other States was resistance to the 
Government. Was informed by officers of 
the Warren county temple, that Missouri, 
Illinois, Indiana and Ohio were so organized; 
and at first it was reported, that several 
of the Eastern States had gone into the or- 
ganization with the same object, and could 
be relied on, but that afterward it was 
found that only the four States named 
had gone thoroughly into the organization, 
and that those only could be relied upon. 

There was a meeting of the Supreme 
Council of the United States, in New York, 
on the 22d of February, and it was after 



i this meeting that the Grand Seignior of the 
I Warren county temple said he was afraid 
I that the States east of Ohio could not be 
depended upon, in case of an outbreak 
against the Government. 

Question by the accused: 

Was it the purpose of those who crossed 
over from the South, as you have stated, 
that you should help the rebels in case of 
an outbreak? 

A. I considered it that way. 

Q. From whom did you learn this? 

A. From a member of the Order of the 
American Knights or Sons of Liberty. 

Q. Did you ever talk with any man from 
the South in regard to helping the Southern 
rebellion? 

A. I do not wish to answer that question. 
I will answer or not, as the Judge Advo- 
cate decides. 

The Judge Advocate informed the wit- 
ness that he must answer every question 
put by the counsel for the accused, if the 
answer did not criminate himself 

A. I have been asked by men, who said 
their homes were in the South or in Mis- 
souri, if we had any intention to assist them 
in case they came over into Illinois. 

Q. Well, and what did you tell them? 

A. That I presumed a great many would, 
and some would not assist them. 

Q. What did you say you would do? 

A. I did not tell them whether I would 
help them or not. 

Q. Now, I wish to ask you what you 
would have done if the rebels had come 
into Illinois ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

Q. What did your society or temple re- 
solve to do, in case of an invasion from Mis- 
souri by the rebels? 

A. I do not think that our temple ever 
passed any resolution that they would as- 
sist the South; we only talked of it at our 
meetings. 

Q. What did you consider you had sworn 
to when you took this obligation? 

The counsel then read the following from 
the obligation of the first degree of the 
Order of American Knights: 

"I do further promise, that I will, at all 
times, if need be, take up arms in the cause 
of the oppressed — in my country first of 
all — against any monarch, prince, potentate, 
power, or government usurped, which may 
be found in arms, and waging war against a 
people or peopl.es who are endeavoring to 
establish, or have inaugurated a govern- 
ment for themselves of their own free 
choice, in accordance with and founded 
upon the eternal principles of truth, which 

I have sworn in the V , and now in this 

presence do swear, to maintain inviolate, 
and defend with my life." 

Q. What did you consider you had sworn 
to maintain inviolate ? 



46 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



A. I considered that obligation bound us 
to assist the South, as they were trying to 
free themselves and form a government of 
their own free choice. 

Q. Do you still hold that this obligation 
is binding on you? 

A. I have taken it on myself, and I con- 
sider that it is. 

Q. You are sworn to help the South, then, 
are you? 

A. That is the way I read the obligation. 

Q. Were the army, then, that you were 
organizing, and the men under the control 
of the order, all bound by this obligation? 

A. I do not know, of my own knowledge, 
that they were. 

Q. Had all these men who were drilling 
taken the Vestibule degree obligation? 

A. I do not think they had, sir. Some 
of those who were drilling, were not mem- 
bers of the order. 

Q. Did they know of the general pur- 
pose of the organization drilling, and that 
it was in pursuance of this obligation ? 

A. I think they did not. 

Q. How did you come to permit these 
men to drill with you? 

A. We took every man who was disposed 
to fall in and drill with us, and said nothing 
about our ulterior purposes. 

Q. Did you not consider that portion of 
the obligation which speaks of " the op- 
pressed," to refer to the negroes enslaved? 

A. I did not put that construction on it. 

Q. What did you consider the phrase, 
"the oppressed — in my country first of 
all" — to imply? 

A. I understood it that the people of the 
South were oppressed, and were trying 
to establish a government of their own 
choice. 

Q. What was meant by the phrase " pow- 
er and Government usurped, which may be 
lound in arms ?" 

A. I will tell you how I understood it. It 
referred to the Government and the army 
of the United States. 

Q. It was against them, then, that you 
were organized to wage a war ? 

A. We were to wage war upon them, of 
course, if they took up arms against the 
South. 

Q. Did you think that the government 
referred to, was the government of the 
whole South ? 

A. That was the opinion where I lived. 

Q. Do you swear that that it was the in- 
tention of the order generally? 

A. I don't know as it was, and I have 
never traveled over other States to learn 
how they considered it, nor conversed with 
members elsewhere about it. 

Q. Did you not state the other day, in 

your examination-in-chief, that you were to 

meet the Southern army if they invaded 

the North, and shake hands with them? 

A. It was the understanding, where I 



lived, that in case of an invasion, we were 
to shake hands with them and be friends. 

Q. Was that the understanding as to the 
relations of the order to them? 

A. It was, as far as my knowledge ex- 
tends, in our section. 

Q. You were willing, then, to shake hands 
with the invaders of the North, and be 
friends with them ? 

A. This was the sentiment in the section 
where I lived. 

Q, Did this sentiment extend beyond the 
order ? 

A. I think some outside of the order felt 
the same way. 

Q. You did not think it wrong, then, to 
welcome them as friends ? 

A. I never understood any thing about 
the right or wrong of the case. Of the two 
evils we were to choose the least. 

Q. What two evils did you consider it the 
least of? 

A. The independence of the South or 
submission to the oppression of the Admin- ><! 
istration. In our section we considered y*^ 
the success of the South the least evil. 

Q. Were you in favor of it against the 
Government of the United States ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you still maintain that feeling in 
your lodges there ? 

A. Yes, sir. At the meeting 1 attended 
three weeks ago, we were pledged to that 
faith. 

Q. How did you come to leave home and 
come here ? 

A. I was brought here by the Provost 
Marshal. A subpena was served on me, in- 
structing me to come here. 

Q. Were you arrested, and then sub- 
penaed? 

A. No, sir. I was brought here, and was 
ignorant as to what I was subpenaed for. 

Q. Did the Government promise you that 
you would be protected against prosecution, 
if you testified against the order? 

A. I have received no assurances* of that 
kind, except what I had here to-day in court 
from the Judge Advocate. 

Q. Did you testify without feAr or favor? 

A. I had fears, but not of this court. 

Q. What were you in fear of? 

A. I have had fears that I would be ar- 
rested when I got home, on the strength of 
the testimony I have given here; and also 
have had fears about the dealings with me 
of the organization to which I belong. 

Q. Did you not tell General Carrington 
that you would be ruined at home on ac- 
count of your testimony? 

A. I may have told him so. 

Q. Why did you expect it would ruin 
you? 

A. I supposed it would so far as the order 
extendb ; for its members are all under the 
same obligation that I have taken. 

Q. Why do you make this exposure of 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



47 



the order, after taking that obligation to 
keep it a secret ? 

A. I have testified before this Court vol- 
untarily, because the law makes it my duty 
to tell the truth; and as an honest and 
truthful man, I mean to tell the truth, and 
nothing else. 

Q. You preferred telling the truth, then, 
and exposing the order, rather than keeping 
your obligation not to reveal the secrets of 
the order ? 

A. I considered this a lawful tribunal, and 
have spoken the whole truth. 

Q. Do you not consider the order a lawful 
organization ? 

A. No, sir, I do not. 

Q. Then you regard the laws of the land 
and of this Government as preferable to 
assisting the Confederacy ? 

A. I regard my obligations to the laws of 
the land first of all, to speak the truth, and 
I wish, so far as in me lies, to respect and 
obey the laws. 

Q. Have you had any inducement held 
out to you to expose this order ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What made you do it ? 

A. Because 1 was brought before this 
Court, and I could not refuse to tell the 
truth without being false to the oath I took 
here. 

Q. Could you not back up on your 
rights ? 

A. Had I been a lawyer, I might have 
done so. 

Q. Did you not do so this morning ? 

A. I said that I would not answer unless I 
was so directed by the Judge Advocate. 

Q. Do you not know that if you had been 
asked any question that would lead you to 
criminate yourself, that you could not be 
compelled to answer it ? 

A. I have never been before a military 
court before ; I am no lawyer, only a farmer, 
and a poor one at that ; and I don't know 
the custom of military courts. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate : 

When 1 saw you in my room, did I, or did 
I not, inform you that you were to speak 
the exact truth, and that without any fear, 
favor or affection ? 

A. You did, sir. 

Q. And without any hope of fee or re- 
ward, or offer of any, in any way whatever ; 
and that all the truth must be spoken with- 
out any swerving or prevarication ? 

A. You did, sir. I felt considerably em- 
barrassed, and when I saw you at your of- 
fice, you spoke to me as you did here. 

Q. Was there any thing said except as to 
the desire of the Government to get at the 
clear, unvarnished truth ? 

A. That was all, sir. 

Q. And what brought you here to-day ? 

A. The subpena from this Commission 



was served upon me, and I had to come and 
testify as I have done. 

TESTIMONY OF WESLEY TRANTER. 

Wesley Tranter, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, being duly sworn, in answer to inter- 
rogatories by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows : 

My home is at Shoal's Station, Martin 
county, Indiana, and am a miller by trade. 
I have not lived at Shoal's Station since I 
informed on this Butternut organization in 
March last. 

In the spring of 1863, I joined a secret 
society, called the Circle of Honor; that 
was directly after I was discharged from the 
army for disability. I was a private in the 
17th Indiana Volunteers, and was with 
Sherman's army. I joined the order at the 
solicitation of a man by the name of Ste- 
phen Horsey. There were about forty or 
fifty in the organization at the time I joined. 
John W. Stone was the head man, as far as 
speaking was concerned. He came round 
to make speeches to the order, and Stephen 
Horsey assisted him. Horsey resides at the 
Shoals still, but Stone, who had some diffi- 
culty with the boys of the 17th Indiana, in 
which he had his fore-finger shot off, went 
away, with his wife, to Kentucky. 

Mr. Horsey, who induced me to join the 
order, said if I would join, he would show 
me the elephant, and if I did not like it 
after I was in, he would get me out. He 
gave the name of the order as the Cir- 
cle of Honor. He said they wanted to find 
out how strong the Democratic party was. 
As I had been a Democrat all my life, I 
joined the order. 

About two months after joining, they 
gave us the Morgan signs, which they said 
would, in the event of our being taken pris- 
oners, and making ourselves known, secure 
us better treatment. 

[The witness, at the request of the Judge 
Advocate, gave the signs, positions, etc., 
which were similar to those described by the 
witness Stidger, as belonging to the Vesti- 
bule degree of the Order of American 
Knights.] 

We had a little book, or ritual, which a 
little fellow, whose name I do not remem- 
ber, and who said he went backward and 
forward to Richmond, brought there. It 
was said that the book had been got up by 
Jeff" Davis for the use of the lodges. 

About January, 1864, Horsey came to me 
and said they were going to have a very im- 
portant meeting. A man by the name of 
T. Baker also asked me to go. I attended 
the meeting. They taught us more of the 
signs of recognition used by the members, 
and swore us into Jeff' Davis' service ; and 
we were to support him. North or South, at 
all hazards. That was no part of the oath 
we took, but if we revealed the secrets of 
the order, we were to suffer our hearts to be 



48 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



torn out, and our bodies to be cut into 
pieces, and the four quarters to be scattered 
north, south, east and west. 

It was said by members that Dr. Bowles 
and H. H. Dodd were connected with this 
organization. Bowles was said to be in 
New Yo)'k, and would meet Stone here at 
Indianapolis about the 26th of March. It 
was said in the order that H. H. Dodd was 
to be Governor of the State, in Morton's 
place ; that Governor Morton was to be put 
out of the way, and Dodd was to be set up 
in his place. Stone said we were to have 
arms, and were to resist the draft. Lincoln, 
he said, had been scared once into putting 
off the draft, but now they would show him 
something that would scare him more than 
that. Lincoln was afraid, he said, of the 
arming going on here in the North. This 
was said at a meeting of the Temple of 
Honor, held about a mile east of the Shoals, 
at a house belonging to a man by the name 
of Gaddis, on a Saturday night, toward the 
laiter part of the month of January. They 
said we must have our old rifles and shot- 
guns fixed up as best we could, and that 
they would have revolvers shipped to them. 
Two boxes of revolvers came there, and a 
man by the name of Coffin, a blacksmith, 
helped to cany them. The boxes were 
passed oflF as jewelry. I was told this by 
Horsey. 

The arms were to be used to assist the 
rebels, and against the blue coats, as they 
called the United States soldiers, and they 
said : '" We will show them how to fight." 
They expressed their intention to resist the 
United States Government, and to support 
the South. Stone said, in his speech, that 
about five days from the first of April, they 
were to take this place (Indianapolis); the 
members of the order in Illinois were to take 
Springfield; while those of Missouri were 
to take St. Louis. Bragg was to do all he 
could in Tennessee ; Morgan was to advance 
his force into Kentucky ; Forrest was to 
cross the Ohio to Illinois, and we were to 
aid. The Indianians were to seize this 
place and the arsenal, and distribute the 
arms to those members of tlie order who 
had none. The arsenal, it was said, would 
be seized when there were but few soldiers 
here. 

At that meeting, Stone said Governor 
Morton was to be put out of the way ; that 
he had but a short time to live after the 
visit here to the arsenal. Stone read a let- 
ter at the meeting, signed M. D., in which 
this was said about Governor Morton. 

At the same meeting, something was said 
about organizing and drilling. I never 
drilled with them, but an old man, by the 
name of Woody, asked me to drill them, as 
I had been in the army, and was supposed 
to know something about it; but I would 
not. 

Among the signs of recognition they had 



in January, 1864, besides that I have men- 
tioned, was the sign 0. A. K., spelling the 
word oak. The letters composing the word 
were to be pronounced alternately by the 
parties meeting. There was also the sign 
of distress. In case of the arrest of a mem- 
ber of the Order, he was to halloo oak-ovn 
three times, when any member of the or- 
der who heard would come to his assistance 
at all hazards. 

I first revealed the designs of the order 
to Captain Henley, in March of this year, 
when I wrote out a statement of the matr 
ter, giving the signs, signals, etc., substan- 
tially as I have given them here. I have 
not seen, read, or heard any thing in con- 
nection with this matter testified to by the 
witness Felix G. Stidger. I have not at- 
tended a meeting of the order since Janu- 
ary, 1864, nor have I conversed with a mem- 
ber of the order since that time. The rea- 
son why I did not continue to attend was, 
that the avowed principles of the order did 
not suit me. I had a brother in the United 
States army, and I told my father that I 
should report on them, and they might do 
just what they liked with me. 

Stone said that communication was kept 
up between the order and the rebels, and 
that the only way to save the Government 
was to elect Jeft' Davis the next President. 
That Jeff Davis had three times offered to 
compromise, and that Lincoln's Govern- 
ment would not do it, and that now some- 
thing would have to be done to make them 
yield. 

I did not join the order as a detective, 
nor have I ever acted as such. I joined it 
in good faith, supposing it to be a legitimate 
organization. I have received no fee or 
offer of reward for my testimony, and no 
promise of any kind has been made to me 
to induce me to testify. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Thursday, October 6, at 10 o'clock, A. M. 

Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
October 6, 1864, 10 o'clock, A. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present; also the Judge 
Advocate, the accused, and his counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

Wesley Tranter, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, resumed his testimony as follows : 

John Stone said, at the meeting in Jan- 
uary I have referred to, that, of the Western 
States, Indiana, Illinois and Missouri would 
join the Southern Confederacy, and that 
they would lick out "Old Abe " and his blue 
coats. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I first made up my mind to expose the 
order the next day after I was sworn into 
the Knights of the Golden Circle. When 
I told my father what my intentions were, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



49 



he was a little scared, and told me to tell 
my uncle at Washington, Davis county, 
which I did, and he advised me to come 
here and report. I came here to Indianap- 
olis about the 10th of March, and Captain 
Henley wrote out my statement. 

The cause of John W. Stone's leaving 
was: a Lieutenant of the 17th Indiana, 
with some of the boys, were going to arrest 
him, to find out if he knew who killed some 
of our soldiers. When Stone saw them 
coming, he tried to make his escape, when 
they fired, and* his fore-finger was said to 
have been shot off. 

The name of the order I joined, was the 
Circle of Honor; I met with them some 
four or five times, when it was reorganized 
as the Knights of the Golden Circle. The 
obligation taken in the Knights of the Gold- 
en Circle was to support Jeff Davis, either 
North or South. 

The soldiers who went to take Stone, also 
went after Horsey, but I think I saved him, 
and Dr. Bowles too. Dr. Bowles was to be 
our general to lead us South to support 
Jeff Davis. Bowles sent for some of us 
boys to go down to French Lick Springs, 
where he lived. I was not alarmed at re- 
ceiving the Morgan signs, and the prospect 
of serving under Bowles. I knew we had 
the right sort of man to lead us, and that 
he would run if there was danger, as he did 
in Mexico, and that we would be safe. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

We had a hailing sign in the order, or 
sign of distress ; it was the word '• oak-oun " 
pronounced three times. 

The statement which Captain Henley 
wrote out from my dictation at the Bates 
House in this city, was sent to General Car- 
rington. 

TESTIMONY OF ELLIOT ROBERTSON. 

Elliot Robertson, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, being duly sworn, in answer to in- 
terrogatories by the Judge Advocate, testi- 
fied as follows : 

I am a farmer, and live in Randolph 
county, Indiana. I joined the Order of the 
Knights of the Golden Circle in Green Fork 
township, Indiana, about the 1st of June, 
1863, or a little later. I joined at the soli- 
citation of a man by the name of John D. 
Burkebyle, who was the chief of the order at 
that place. A person named Nathan Brown, 
who was understood in the order to have 
been sent from the leaders here in Indian- 
apolis, organized the order in our town- 
ship. I do not recollect the obligation I 
took, except the penalty for disclosing the 
secrets of the order, which was death ; the 
body being cut into four quarters, one part 
to be cast out at each gate, north, south, 
east and west. They had grips and signs, 
etc., by which members of the order could 
recognize and test each other. First we 
4 



stood in a military position, with the heel 
of the right foot in the hollow of the left, 
arms folded, with the two fiist fingers of 
the left hand apart. This position was an- 
swered, when it was recognized, by passing 
the right hand across the face, as though 
stroking the mustache. Another sign was 
a grip, in which each party held the fore- 
finger so that it should reach as far as it 
could up the wrist. 

The order was understood to be organized 
for military purposes, and about one-half of 
the members were armed. The intention 
of the order was to oppose the Administra- 
tion in its attempts to put down the rebel- 
lion. 

The name of the order was changed to 
American Knights about September, 1863. 
I was invited to join the new order, but did 
not. I was instructed in it by the captain 
of the Knights of the Golden Circle. 
Nearly all who belonged to the Knights of 
the Golden Circle became members of the 
new order. 

I passed into a lodge of the American 
Knights in Gratis township, Preble county, 
Ohio, about two months ago. A friend of 
mine took me, but nothing particular was 
done. I have not attended any regular 
meeting of the order since September, 1863. 

One purpose of the organization was to 
oppose the draft and arbitrary arrests, and 
by force of arms, if need be; but the un- 
derstanding was, that our operations were 
to be confined to Indiana. 

Burkebyle and Brown said that it was 
only in part determined what should be 
done in case of the draft. It was said at a 
meeting of the order, that should a draft 
be made, they would know in time whether 
we were to resist or not. 

The captain said he had orders from In- 
dianapolis to arm the members of the or- 
der. The question was discussed as to how 
we should get arms. Some were in favor 
of buying their oWn arms, but the captain 
said there were plenty of arms here in In- 
dianapolis, and we were not to be uneasy 
about that. I do not know of any arms 
being distributed, except from hearsay. 

I joined the order more out of curiosity 
than any thing else. I iiever acted in any 
capacity as a United States Detective. My 
testimony before this Commission is volun- 
tary, and no ofier or promise of reward, 
in any way, has been made to me to induce 
me to testify in this case. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I volunteered as a soldier in the 16th 
Indiana, on the 22d of August last, and 
made a statement to General Carring- 
ton respecting the order soon after I vol- 
unteered. Have not joined my regiment 
yet, or been on particular duty. I should 
have made a statement of the objects of 
the organization to the authorities before, 



60 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



if I could have received protection for so 
doing. I made a statement to 'Squire 
Hough, I think in October, which was 
Bworn to by me. I met with the order 
after making this statement to 'Squire 
Hough, but only to learn their intentions 
more fully. I was formerly a Eepublican, 
but had become a Democrat before joining 
the order. When I made the statement 
to 'Squire Hough, I was a Union man, and 
did not want to favor the order. 

I only know of one attempt to resist 
what was called arbitrary arrests. Burke- 
byle thought he was going to be arrested, 
and I and some of the members of the or- 
der met at his house to resist it. Burke- 
byle said to me, that it had become known 
that he was a member of the Order of the 
Knights of the Golden Circle. We met at 
his house two nights. I was armed with a 
gun. Burkebyle's two boys, Henry Woodin, 
Henry Robinson, and another man, were 
there. 

J. D. Burkebyle was our captain, Abram 
Piatt was treasurer, and Francis Burridge 
was secretary; Amos Crew was lieutenant, 
and Henry Woodin sergeant. There were 
between sixty and seventy-five members in 
the order at Green Fork township. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Friday, October 7, at half-past 8, A. M. 

Court Booh, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
October 7, 1864, 8% A. M.j 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present, except Colonel 
Benjamin Spooner. Also present the Judge 
Advocate, and the counsel for the accused. 

It was then announced by the Judge Ad- 
vocate that the accused, Harrison H. Dodd, 
had escaped, and could not be present; he 
therefore asked for an adjournment of 
the Commission till 11 o'clock A. M., at 
which time he proposed to submit the case 
to the Commission, that they might proceed 
to the finding and sentence. 

The counsel for the accused, Jonathan 
W. Gordon, Esq., and Martin M. Ray, Esq., 
then submitted to the Commission an affi- 
davit touching the escape of the accused: 

United States of America 

vs. 

Ilarriaou H. Dodd. 



[■Be 



fore Military Com. 



Be it remembered, that on this 7th day of 
October, 1864, personally came before me 



The following extract from the report of Colonel A. J. 
Warner, Commander of the Post, ludiauapolitj, to Cap- 
tain A. C. Kemper, A. A. G., gives all the particulars 
known of the escape of H. H. Dodd, on the morning of 
the 7th of October: 

Mr. Harrisun H. Dodd, who was on trial in this city 
before the Military Commission, on a charge of trea- 
son and conspiracy, made his escape from the room oc- 
cupied by him, in the third story of the Post OflBce 
Building, a few minutes before 4 o'clock this morning. 
He escaped through the window, opening on Pennsylva- 
nia street, by means of a rope attached to an iron rod, 
which was held fast between his bed and the iron win- 
dow shutter. A ball of twine had been conveyed to him 



H. L. Burnett, Judge Advocate Department 
of the Ohio and Northern Department, 
Jonathan W. Gordon and Martin M. Ray, 
the counsel for Harrison H. Dodd, in trial 
before a Military Commission, in the city 
of Indianapolis, and being by me duly 
sworn according to law, depose and say 
jointly and severally, each for himself, that 
they have this morning heard with sur- 
prise of the escape of their client, H. H. 
Dodd, from his prison, in this city. 

They further declare, as an act due from 
them to this Commission, that never 
by word, act or intimation, did they, or 
either of them, counsel, prompt, suggest or 
intimate to said Dodd, or to any friend or 
acquaintance of said Dodd, or any one else, 
his escape from prison; nor was any thing 
upon the subject ever intimated among 
themselves; nor had they, at any time, from 
any source, any notice or suspicion that said 
Dodd contemplated any such escape ; and 
they thus declare their entire innocence, 
in thought, word or deed of his escape. 
And they ask this statement to go upon the 
record in this cause. M. M. RAY, 

J. W. GORDON. 

Sworn to before me, and subscribed in my 
presence, this 7th day of October, 1864. 

H. L. BURNETT, 
Judge Advocate Department of the Ohio and 

Northern Department. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
at 11 o'clock, A. M. 

AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Court Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
October 7, 1864, 11 o'clock, A. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

The same members present as at the 
morning session. Also, the Judge Advo- 
cate, and the counsel for the accused. 

The Judge Advocate then addressed the 
Commission as follows : 

The accused, Harrison H. Dodd, having 
made his escape, as I announced at the first 
session to-day, I had thought of asking the 
Commission to proceed on the evidence al- 
ready before them to their finding and sen- 
tence ; and though it may be the course I 



by some of his friends who had been permitted to visit 
him, by means of which he had drawn up to his window 
a large rope, furnished by some persons outside, who 
assisted iu his escape. 

There was no guard on the outside of the building, 
and the attempt was not detected, until the prisoner had 
reached the ground and escaped. The street lamps near 
by had been previously darkened to conceal the move- 
ment. 

When Mr. Dodd petitioned Brevet Major General 
Hovey, Commander of the District, to be allowed to oc- 
cupy a room in the Post Oflice Building, instead of being 
closely confined iu the Military Prison, he gave his 
parole of honor, that he would make no attempt to es- 
cape. His brother also pledged his word, and stated he 
wuuld risk all he was worth that U. H. Dodd would not 
try to escape, if this privilege was granted. 

Measures, therefore, that would have been taken to 
prevent escape, by placing guards on the outside as 
well as within the building, were not, under the cir* 
cumstances, resorted to iu this case. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



51 



shall finally ask the Commission to pursue, 
I think it best at present to recommend 
that the Commission adjourn till such time 
as they think best. In the mean time, I 
will prepare the papers against some other 
prisoners, with whose trial we may proceed, 
allowing the present case to remain for the 
time in its present condition. 

The law, so far as I have been able to ex- 
amine the decisions in the United States 
Eeports, and the reports of the States of 
New York, Indiana, Alabama, Arkansas, 
and one of the Ohio Eeports, all go to this 
extent : That where a prisoner, by his own 
default, is not present to receive the verdict 
of the jury and the sentence of the Court, 
waives, by his own act. the constitutional 
right which he had, that he could not again 
be put in jeopardy of life or limb ; but hav- 
ing, by his own act, deprived himself of that 
privilege, he may again be put upon trial for 
the same offense. Or, as the law expresses 
it,- there was from the beginning no jeop- 
ardy, or it can not be said there was a real 
jeopardy, because he may, from the begin- 
ning, have had an intent to escape before 
the sentence of the law could act upon him. 
The civil decisions say, further, that while 
he has deprived himself of that privilege, 
yet, as a general rule, the Court can not pro- 
ceed to sentence, or the jury to give a ver- 
dict, because he may have the privilege of 
"polling the jury." It is one of the rights 
of the accused to make a claim or plea to 
the Court, and his presence is necessary to 
the rendition of the verdict and the passing 
of sentence. Later decisions, however, by 
the Supreme Court of this State, and also 
the Supreme Court of Ohio, go to the ex- 
tent that if a person, of his own default, is 
not present to receive the verdict of the 
jury and the sentence of the Court, yet the 
Court may receive the verdict of the jury 
and give sentence. I apprehend, therefore, 
that this reasoning would hold with greater 
force before a court-martial or military com- 
mission, for the reason, that in a court-mar- 
tial or military commission, the accused is 
never present when the Court proceed to 
their finding and sentence. The moment I 
say to the Commission, " The evidence on 
behalf of the Government is closed," the 
accused may introduce evidence to rebut 
that which has been introduced on the part 
of the prosecution, or he may waive that 
privilege, and present his defense in the 
shape of an address, called " the Address 
of the Accused," and given under oath, or 
otherwise, and which may be received by 
the Court in extenuation or mitigation of 
his sentence. But if, for any reason, the ac- 
cused abandons his cause, and fails to rebut 
the evidence produced on the part of the 
Oovernment, he waives his right of address; 
in other words, he says, " I have no defense." 
The Court then proceeds to close the doors 
to deliberate on the finding and sentence. 



I do not see why such a course could not be 
pursued in strict accordance with reason 
and justice, and the due observance of mili- 
tary law. 

I make these suggestions at this time, that 
the gentlemen engaged as counsel for the 
accused may be made aware of what may 
be claimed in the premises on the part of 
the Government. 

I now ask the Commission to adjourn to 
such time as they may deem best. 

The Commission, after deliberation, ad- 
journed to meet on Thursday, October 13, 
1864, at 2 o'clock, P. M. 



Court Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
October 13, 18G4, 2 o'clock, P. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

In consequence of the absence of a mem- 
ber, the Commission adjourned to meet on 
Saturday, October 15, 1864, at 9 o'clock, 
A. M. 



CouET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, > 
October 15, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present ; also the Judge 
Advocate, and the counsel for the accused. 

Absent, the accused, Harrison H. Dodd. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

The Judge Advocate then addressed the 
Commission as follows : 

As I intimated at the last session of the 
Commission preceding our late informal 
meeting, I propose now to submit the case 
of the accused, Harrison H. Dodd, on the 
evidence already introduced, and to ask the 
Commission to proceed to their finding in 
the case, and, in the event of finding against 
the accused, to sentence. 

For authorities in support of such a course, 
I propose simply to cite certain late decis- 
ions in similar cases, by the Supreme Court 
of Ohio, and also by the Supreme Court of 
this State. 

The first case is from the Ohio Reports, 
vol. VII, page 180. Charles Fight vs. The 
State. The plaintiff was arraigned at the 
August term of the Brown Common Pleas 
Court, plead not guilty, and, on his motion 
and giving security, the prosecution was 
continued to the November term. He was 
placed on trial before the jury on the fourth 
day of the succeeding term, and the testi- 
mony being partly heard, the Court ad- 
journed until the next morning, at which 
time the Court met, and the plaintiff being 
called, made default. The Court then is- 
sued a bench-warrant for the plaintiff, and 
proceeded to charge the jury. On the next 
day the jury rendered a verdict of guilty, 
which was received by the Court in the ab- 
sence of the plaintiff. At the succeeding 
March term, the plaintiff asked for a new 



b-1 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



trial, assigning, among other reasons, that 
the jury had heard only a part of the testi- 
mony, and that the verdict was brought in 
during his absence. This was overruled, 
when the plaintifl" moved an arrest of judg- 
ment for substantially the same reasons. 
The case was argued before the Supreme 
Court, and the opinion delivered by Judge 
^Vood was concurred in by all the Court. 

The synoj^sis gives the point of the case 
in these words: 

"Where, pending a trial upon a criminal 
prosecution, the accused, being on bail, ab- 
sconds, it is legal to proceed with the case, 
and to receive a verdict of guilty in his ab- 
sence." 

The opinion of the Court is as follows : 

'' In England, in misdemeanors, where the 
defendant is on bail, a trial, a conviction and 
sentence may be had in his absence. He is 
present or not, at his option. In felonies, a 
difterent rule, it is true, prevails. The ac- 
cused must be present when every principle 
of the law is discussed and determined in 
which he is concerned. The reason of this 
difference in the mode of proceeding in the 
two cases can not, perhaps, at this time, be 
satisfactorily ascertained ; or, rather, no sat^ 
isfactory reason can be given for it. A 
prisoner in close custody may be so easily 
oppressed and deprived of his rights, and it 
would be so extremely difficult for him to 
make known his injuries and obtain redress, 
that to prevent unnecessary restraint, and 
to afford the accused an opportunity of be- 
ing fully and fairly heard, the rule in refer- 
ence to him may be reasonable and salutary; 
but it would apply with force to all classes 
of oftenders. But in felony, the accused is 
not necessarily confined within the four 
walls of the prison. Both before and after 
the conquest, all felonies were bailable by 
the common ancient law. The Stat. WeMon, 1 
and 3 Ed., 1 c, 15 ; 23 Hen., 9, c. 9 ; and 1 and 
2 Ph. and Mar., c. 13, except treason and mur- 
der, and certain other crimes from those for 
which the King's justices may bail. {Bl 
Com., 4 vol., 208.) But the Court of King's 
Bench, or any judge thereof, in vacation, 
may, at their discretion, admit persons to 
bail, in all cases whatsoever. (3 East., 163, 5 J. 
R, 169), but none can claim this benefit de 
jure (2 Hale, 129). If on bail, I apprehend, 
neither the courts of Great Britain nor the 
United States would proceed to impannel a 
jury, in a trial for felony, unless the ac- 
cused were present to look to his challen- 
ges. If the trial, however, is once com- 
menced, and the prisoner, in his own wrong, 
leaves the Court, abandons his case to the manage- 
ment of counsel, and runs away, I can find no 
adjudged case to sustain the position, that 
in England the proceedings would be stayed. 
Such a case must form an exception to the 
general rule, and the verdict may be legally 
received in the absenre of the acc^ised. The 
prisoner can not be deprived of his right to 



I be present, at all stages of his trial; but 
that he must be, under all circumstances, or 
the proceedings will be erroneous, can not, 
we think, be sustained." 

The next case I shall cite is from vol. 14, 
Indiana Reports, page 39. It is an opinion 
delivered by Judge Perkins, of this State,in 
the case of McCorkle vs. Tlie State. I shall 
read only that portion of the opinion appli- 
cable to this point: 

" The constitution and laws provide that 
a defendant in a criminal case shall be pres- 
ent at his trial. This is for a twofold object: 

" 1. That the defendant may have the op- 
portunity of meeting the witnesses and 
jury face to face, and of directing the causes 
of his trial. 

" 2. That the State may be in possession 
of his person, so that judgment may be ex- 
ecuted thereon. 

"Now, the question is. are not these pro- 
visions, so far as they are in favor of the de- 
fendant, designed to confer a privilege which 
he may waive? He can waive a trial alto- 
gether, and plead guilty. He can waive the 
constitutional and legal privilege of trial by 
jury. He can waive the constitutional and 
legal privilege of being a second time put 
in jeopardy. And shall it be said that he 
can not waive his privilege of being present 
when his witnesses are examined, or any 
one of them ? Then did he, as a question 
of fact, make such waiver in this case ? If 
he had voluntarily arisen in Court, and 
asked to be absent in the custody of an of- 
ficer, or otherwise, for a period of time, re- 
questing that the trial should proceed in 
his absence, the waiver would be clear. But 
how does such a step differ, in substance, 
from a voluntary deiiarture without asking 
that the trial shall stop ? In one case the 
consent is vocally, in the other, tacitly, but 
equally clearly, expressed." 

This was a case in which the prisoner ab- 
sented himself during a portion of his trial. 
The next case in point is reported in the 
Sixteenth Indiana Reports, page 357. The 
State vs. Wamire. The opinion was deliv- 
ered by Judge Perkins, and is the last case 
in point, on record, that I know of 

" 3. The court is not bound to discharge 
the jury because of the voluntary absence 
of the defendant during the trial, he hav- 
ing been present at the commencement, 
\_McCorkle vs. The State, Fourteenth Indiana, 
39; Fight vs. The State, Seventh Ohio {Ham.) 
Reports, Part 1, page 181], but may proceed 
on to verdict, at all events, in his absence." 

In all the cases I have cited, the authori- 
ties go further than I ask the Commission 
to proceed. I do not propose to introduce 
testimony in the absence of the accused, 
but simply to submit the case to the Com- 
mission upon the evidence already intro- 
duced, and upon this evidence 1 ask the 
Commission to proceed to its finding and 
sentence. The reason for such a course is- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



53 



stronger in a court of this kind, than it 
would be before a civil tribunal. The mo- 
ment I am able to say to the Commission, 
''The evidence in the case is closed,'" the 
accused would have to withdraw by the 
rules of the court, and the court-room 
would be cleared, and the Commission 
would at once proceed to deliberate upon 
the evidence and to arrive at their finding 
and sentence. When that finding and sen- 
tence is arrived at, it is not made known to 
the accused by this Commission ; it is not 
known as possessing vitality or even exist- 
ence, vmtil it has been submitted to the 
convening authority, and by him reviewed 
and approved. If approved, it is made 
known to the accused by the Commanding 
General, or, in technical phrase, it is "pro- 
mulgated " in General Orders. 

In this case the accused has waived — as 
is frequently done by prisoners — his right 
and privilege of introducing rebutting tes- 
timony, and also his right and privilege of 
submitting his final appeal or address to the 
Commission. 

I therefore submit the case to the Com- 
mission, and ask them to proceed to their 
finding and sentence. 

REPLY OF J. W. GORDON, ESQ., COUKSEL FOR 
THE ACCUSED. 

May it please the Court : 

I wish to say one word in relation to the 
position taken by the Judge Advocate upon 
the authorities he has just read. These au- 
thorities — more properly decisions — at least 
in the State of Indiana, have been gravely 
and severely questioned by learned mem- 
bers of the jjrofession, and by the profession 
generally ; and I doubt whether in the 
future they will not be overruled. They 
yet stand, however, as the opinion of our 
Supreme Court. If it be granted, therefore, 
that they are law — that they govern to a 
certain extent the proceedings of our State 
courts, in the trial of felons, is it quite cer- 
tain that they are applicable to the case 
now before this Commission ? Is it certain 
that they can be properly emjiloyed as au- 
thorities even analogically, in a military 
court, upon the trial of a military ofltense? 

Precedent makes law. I ajjprehend, how- 
ever, that no military man, or. indeed, any 
one else, will be able to find, after the most 
thorough examination of the military au- 
thorities, a single precedent, where a mili- 
tary jjrisoner, having been once before a 
military court, entered upon his trial, pro- 
ceeded to some length therein, and then 
escaped, and has yet been proceeded against 
in that trial unto sentence. I apprehend 
that no precedent can be found to that 
effect. I am quite certain that the books 
which I have been able to consult, furnish 
no such precedent ; and I think it is so for 
the best of all possible reasons — the reason 
that there does not exist such a precedent. 



In all military^proceedings of this charac- 
ter, the accused is arrested. If he be an 
officer, the order of arrest confines him to 
his quarters, or to the camp, or gives him 
such limits as the commanding officer may 
think proper to prescribe. If he be an en- 
listed man, he is generally confined, and 
especially if the ofiense be heinous, to the 
guard-house, a close prisoner. There is no 
bail in luilitary cases ; no such thing as 
allowing the accused to go at large ; and, 
hence, when his trial begins he must be 
present. He is accordingly brought before 
the court, if he be an enlisted man, under 
guard; if an officer, by citation; but, in 
either case, he is always required to be 
present when the trial opens; present all 
the way along through the trial; and, as I 
said before, I have yet to find the first j^re- 
cedent in military law, where, in a military 
court, a prisoner has been proceeded against 
in his absence. 

The case before the Commission is not 
unlike that of an enlisted man. The ac- 
cused here, not being an officer, had the 
limits of no camp allowed him. He was 
confined to his prison, to his room, with a 
guard at his door, and subjected to pretty 
severe surveillance. I know it has been 
said that he was on his parole of honor ; 
and no doubt he did give his word to the 
General, or to the party who enlarged him 
and placed him in more comfortable quar- 
ters in this building; but it was not a case 
of parole of honor, as that existing in the 
army with prisoners of war. It was not a 
case in which there was any provision made 
by the law of the land, or military law for 
paroling. On the contrary, it wtis a case in 
which the order of the Pi'csident, the only 
law on the subject, provided that there 
should be no writ of habeas coj-piis ; and, of 
course, no enlargement of the prisoner. He 
was, then, a prisoner under guard. He has 
escaped. These authorities, therefore, can 
not, as I conceive, be held applicable to 
this case, however fit to be followed in civil 
courts, where all felons, except traitors and 
murderers, may be at large during their 
trial, as in the case of McCorkle, and, I 
think, of the others whose cases have been 
cited. 

If, therefore, the accused has escaped, 
the law must, in my opinion, be held to be 
different in his case in this court from that 
maintained in the civil courts of the State 
of Indiana upon the cases cited; and, I 
think so, not only for the protection of the 
accused, should he be again arrested, but 
also for the protection of the rights of the 
Government True, the Government may 
waive its rights as against him ; but, as I 
understand, there is yet more evidence to 
be adduced against him. Should the case, 
therefore, be now submitted to the Com- 
mission, upon the evidence already before 
them, and should that evidence turn out, 



54 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



in their opinion, not to be sufficient to sus- 
tain the charges and specifications against 
him, why, then, the Government, by this 
course — which, I admit, is not my affair, 
and I only make the suggestion by permis- 
sion — will lose forever the opportunity of 
bringing him to condign punishment, even 
should he be really guilty of these offenses. 
If the cause is submitted now upon this 
evidence, and the constitutional provision 
shall be held to apply to this case, he will 
not be allowed to be put in jeopardy again 
for any one of these offenses. This is a 
consideration, however, which belongs en- 
tirely to the Government side of the case. 
The prosecutor may introduce further evi- 
dence if he think proper; or may stop at any 
stage of the proceedings. 

But the accused is not here; and the 
nature of the punishment that may be in- 
flicted, should he be found guilty, affords 
another reason why he should be present 
before proceeding to sentence him. These 
are all of a corporeal, physical nature, oper- 
ating upon the person. The leading charac- 
teristic of them all is, that they operate 
upon the person ; and there is, indeed, no 
means of enforcing a pecuniary punishment 
inflicted by such a court as this, except 
where the prisoner is in custody ; and 
much less certainly of punishing him ppr- 
sonally without having him first in custody. 

In view of these considerations, then, the 
first question before you will be : 

1. " Shall we proceed with the case now 
before us to final sentence?" 

If this question should be determined in 
the affirmative, upon the authorities cited 
by the Judge Advocate, then the second 
question for your decision will be : 

2. " Shall we proceed in pursuance of 
these authorities, and admit further evi- 
dence should it be offered, because these 
authorities go to that extent?" 

If the prisoner had escaped during the 
trial in a civil court, that court would have 
allowed the trial to go on to verdict and 
judgment in his absence, just as it would 
have gone on in his presence. Evidence 
would have been adduced, and argument of 
counsel heard, just as if the prisoner had 
remained present. If we take civil prece- 
dents for our guides, and abandon the path 
generally followed by military tribunals, we 
should confer upon the absent defendant 
the right to go on to final judgment by tlie 
same stages, that he would have been 
allowed to proceed in, had he remained 
personally present. The cases cited go thus 
far. 

I submit, then, that, in the first place, 
the court will not proceed to final sentence 
in this case; and, in the second, that, if 
they do, they will proceed by the same 
stages indicated by these authorities, allow- 
ing evidence to be adduced in behalf of the 
defense, and the case to be closed just as it 



would have been, had the accused remained 

present. 

The Judge Advocate, in reply, said : 

With i-espect to going forward with testi- 
mony on the part of the accused in his ab- 
sence, the Commission will find, on an ex- 
amination of the cases cited — especially the 
Seventh Ohio and Fourteenth Indiana Reports — 
that a prisoner's counsel has no authority, 
the prisoner having abandoned his cause, to 
introduce evidence and make a defense. 
He certainly can not do it in a military 
court But the authorities go further, and 
say that the Government shall not be pre- 
judiced by the action of the prisoner. Now, 
I apprehend that if the prisoner was not 
present at the commencement of the trial, 
and proof was introduced in his absence, 
and the case begun while he was away, that 
the court, seeking for truth and justice, 
would decide that the defendant's counsel 
should have the privilege of coming in with 
evidence in his behalf; but the case sup- 
posed is not analagous to that now before 
this Commission. Here the prisoner sits on 
until the Government has proved its case, 
and if at that stage of the proceedings he 
abandons his case, he says, in fact, "I have 
no defense;" and, having thus waived his 
right of a further hearing, he can not come 
in by counsel and ask that he may be 
heard, when he is not present for the law 
to act upon him. 

On the evidence already before the Com- 
mission, produced in the presence of the 
accused, and subjected to the cross-examin- 
ation of his counsel, I submit the case, and 
ask the Commission to proceed to their 
finding and sentence. 

The Commission may grant to the coun- 
sel for the accused, as a matter of courtesy, 
and not as a matter of right, the privilege 
of putting in their views on the evidence 
before the Commission. 

The court-room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. On being reopened, the Judge. 
Advocate announced that the Commission 
would proceed to their finding on the evi- 
dence already introduced, and that no more 
evidence should be heard in the case; but 
tliat, as a matter of courtesy to the counsel 
for the accused, they would be permitted to 
put in their argument on the proof already 
submitted. 

Tlie Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Monday, October 17, at 10 o'clock, A. M. 



Covet Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
October 17, 18G4, 10 o'clock, A. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present; also the Judge 
Advocate, and the counsel for the ac- 
cused. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

The counsel for the accused then sub- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



55 



mitted the following argument to the Com- 
mission : 

Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission: 

This cause has been brought to an abrupt 
conclusion by an unforeseen contingency, 
which otherwise might have been preven- 
ted. No men regret the fact more sincerely 
than we, the counsel for the defendant. 
We regret it both for public and private 
reasons; for we have no doubt that the 
cloud of suspicion which must have arisen 
from the testimony for the prosecution, as 
it now stands unimpeached, uncontradicted, 
and seemingly corroborated by the sudden 
disappearance of the defendant, might have 
been, in a good degree, if not indeed, al- 
together, dissipated by counter-proof and a 
thorough defense. Just as little do we 
doubt that a more thorough and complete 
investigation of the whole case, by an ex- 
amination of all the witnesses, and a careful 
discussion of the great questions of law in- 
volved, would have limited the apprehen- 
sion of danger to the peace of society and 
the stability of the Government, which 
may have arisen in the public mind from 
the testinnony already before the country ; 
and thus have restored confidence between 
man and man, as well as general tranquillity. 
The absence of the defendant, however, 
prevents the further development of the 
facts of the case ; and the sudden determin- 
ation of the trial puts an end to investiga- 
tions of the law applicable thereto, which 
we had determined should be thorough 
and exhaustive. In both respects, there- 
fore, we feel that we have reason for sin- 
cere and profound regret, for we are under 
the necessity of giving up to you for final 
judgment an imperfect cause — the broken 
fragment of what we had fondly hoped to 
make it ; and upon this fragment you are 
expected to render complete justice to the 
whole of which it forms but a part. While 
this labor and the difficulty thereof are 
yours, we shall follow your action with a soli- 
citude for the result far more painful and pro- 
found than we should have felt had our own 
labors been more thorough and complete. 

Duly grateful for the privilege accorded 
to us by the Commission of addressing it 
upon the whole case, before it is finally 
submitted for adjudication, we shall pro- 
ceed at once to the consideration of the 
questions arising in the record. These 
questions are of two kinds: 

I. Questions of law; 

II. Questions of fact. 

I. OF QUESTIONS OF LAW. 

These again naturally divide themselves 
into classes. Thus, we have questions: 

1. In relation to the jurisdiction of the 
Commission to try the defendant upon the 
charges and specifications preferred against 
him: 



2. In relation to the liability of the de- 
fendant to be tried before any court for 
certain alleged oft'enses charged against 
him; and 

1. Of questions in relation to the jurisdiction of 
the Commission^ etc. 

Of these questions we should not have 
spoken at this time had the determination 
of the Commission been final; for the 
question of jurisdiction has already been 
presented and decided. The whole case, 
however, we understand, will be reviewed 
before any sentence can be inflicted upon 
the defendant; and in order, therefore, 
that the reviewing officer may have all the 
lights we can furnish upon this important 
point, we recur to it in this place. And 
we feel that, whether this Commission shall 
deem itself authorized to review its deci- 
sion in relation to its jurisdiction or not, its 
members will not take offense at our recur- 
rence to that topic, nor deem it an abuse 
of the privilege accorded to us of submit- 
ting this final address. 

If this Commission has jurisdiction to try 
the defendant upon the charges preferred 
against him, it must be because martial law 
had been proclaimed before these offenses 
were committed, and is still in force in the 
State of Indiana; for it will hardly be con- 
tended that, if martial law was not in force 
at the time of the alleged offenses, or has 
ceased to operate since that time, this Com- 
mission can have jurisdiction of this cause. 
The question then, which meets us at the 
threshold of this discussion, is this : 

Is martial law in force in the State of Indi- 
ana at the present timef 

Upon the right answer to this question 
must depend the right answer to the ques- 
tion: 

Has this Commission jurisdiction of the cause 
now before it? 

Before we can determine whether martial 
law is in force here or not, it is important 
for us to ascertain what martial law is. What 
then is martial law, the presence of which 
alone can authorize this trial, and give valid- 
ity to its results? 

We will answer this question by the au- 
thorities. 

" Martial law is the law of war, and de- 
pends on the just but arbitrary power of 
the king, or his lieutenant; for though the 
king does not make any law but by com- 
mon consent in Parliament, yet, in time of 
war, by reason of the necessity of it, to 
guard against dangers that often arise, he 
xiseth absolute power, so that his word is 
law." — Smith on the English Republic, Book 2, 
ch. 4. 

" Martial law may be defined as the law, 
(whatever it may be,) which is imposed by 
military power." — 2 Steph. Comm. on the Laws 
of Eng., p. 561. 

" Martial law is neither more nor less than 
the will of the general who commands the 



56 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



army." — Duke of Wellington in Hmisards 
Debates in Parliament, (3 series) vol. 115, 
p. 880. 

'■'■ Military law" [employed here as synon- 
ymous with martial law,'] "' as applied to any 
persons, excei^ting the officers, soldiers, and 
followers of the army, for whose govern- 
ment there are particular provisions of law 
in all well regulated countries, is neither 
more nor less than the will of the general 
of the army." — Dispatches of the Duke of Wel- 
lington, vol. 6, p. 43. 

"I am sure that I was not wrong in law, 
for I had the advice of Lord Cottenham, 
Lord Campbell, and the Attorney General, 
Sir J. Juves, and explained to my noble 
friend, that what is called proclaiming mar- 
tial law is no law at all, but merely, for the 
sake of public safety, in circumstances of 
great emergency, setting aside all law, and 
acting under military power." — Earl Gray, 
as cited by Hough in Precedents in Military 
Laia, p. 515. 

"When martial law is proclaimed, courts- 
martial are thereby vested with such a sum- 
mary proceeding that neither time, place, 
nor person are considered. Necessity is the 
only rule of conduct ; nor are the punish- 
ments which couiis-martial may inflict under 
such authority, limited to "such as pre- 
scribed by law." — Hough on Courts^iartial, p. 
383. 

" In truth and reality, it " — martial law — 
" is not a law, but something indulged 
rather than allowed as a law. The neces- 
sity of government, order, and discipline in 
an army, is that only which can give those 
laws a countenance ; qtwd enim necessitas cogit 
dffendi." — 1 Hale His. Com. Law. Sergeant 
Runnington's edition, London, 1794, p. — . 

This, then, is martial law — " the will of the 
general; ' "the arbitrary power of the king, 
or his lieutenant;" the means whereby "he 
useth absolute power, so that his word is 
law;" "the law which is imposed by mili- 
tary power;" "not a law at all;' the "set- 
ting aside all law and acting under military 
power;" a state in which "necessity is the 
only rule of conduct;" and "neither time, 
place, nor persons are Cjonsidered;" and 
wherein "the punishments which courts- 
martial may inflict" are neither limited 
nor prescribed by law. 

Does this law exist here, at this moment? 
Has it ever existed here ? Is it, indeed, our 
law? Are the people of the State of In- 
diana thus stript of all their legal and con- 
stitutional rights; and reduced to this ab- 
solute bondage? Are the Constitution and 
laws of the United States suspended? 
Have tlie State Constitution and laws in 
like manner ceased to operate? If not, i 
then, martial laiv does not exist here. If so,' 
then, by what authority have they ceased 
to operate? By wliom have they been sus- 
pended? Whence was the power derived 
that has suspended them? All power, the' 



underived power of Almighty God, must 
have an origin. But from whom comes 
this power to put an end, for the time being, 
and. it may be, forever, to the Federal and 
State Governments of the United States ; 
and to all the rights they were organized to 
protect and defend ? 

These questions must be answered before 
martial law, as insisted upon, can stand justi- 
fied in the presence of the intelligence of 
the nineteenth century. But how shall we 
answer them ? 

It has been insisted by the Judge Advo- 
cate, that martial law is in force here for two 
reasons. These are as follows : 

1. Because the President of the United 
States proclaimed martial laiv on the 24th of 
September, 1862, in tlte following terms : 

" First. That during the existing insurrec- 
tion, and as a necessary measure for sup- 
pressing the same, all rebels and insurgents, 
their aiders and abettors, within the United 
States, and all persons discouraging volun- 
teer enlistments, resisting militia drafts, or 
guilty of any disloyal practice, affording aid 
and comfort to rebels against the authority 
of the United States, shall be subject to 
martial law, and liable to trial and punish- 
ment by courts-martial or military commis- 
sion. 

"iSfeconc?. That the writ of habeas corpus 
is suspended in respect to all persons ar- 
rested, or who hereafter dui-ing the rebel- 
lion shall be imprisoned in any fort, camp, 
arsenal, military prison, or other place of 
confinement by any militaiy authority, or 
by the sentence of any court-martial or 
military commission." 

2. Because the enforcement of martial law 
is essential to the preservation of the life 
of the Republic. 

It may be that we do not state these rea- 
sons in the order in which they were pro- 
pounded, nor in the language employed. 
But the order of statement can not effect 
the questions they present ; and the sub- 
stance of the reasons are here given as pre- 
sented. Let us, then, proceed to consider 
them. 

I. Does the Proclamation of the Presi- 
dent just cited, suspend the Constitution 
and laws of the United States, and of the 
several States ? This question involves two 
others, namely: 

a. Had the President authority to pro- 
claim martial law, and suspend the habeas 
corpus as to the subjects thereof, at the time 
he issued this Proclamation? 

b. If so, is this Proclamation still in 
force ; or, if rescinded, has it been followed 
by a subsequent one of equivalent force ? 

a. It will be admitted that if the Presi- 
dent had no authority to suspend the privi- 
lege of the writ of habeas corpus throughout 
the United States, at the date of the fore- 
going Proclamation, he could have had no 
autliority to proclaim martial law to the same 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



57 



extent ; for a proclamation of martial law in- 
volves not only the suspension of the writ 
of habeas corpus^ but, also, the privileges and 
immunities of all other laws, whether State 
or Federal, common or statute, municipal 
or constitutional. 

Had the President power, then, to sus- 
pend the privileges of the writ of habeas 
corpus ? It would seem not, both on princi- 
pal and authority. During the progress of 
our country, this question had been judi- 
cially considered and settled before the 
commencement of the present war , and 
the authorities stand thus on this point : 

" Practically, as yet. Congress has never 
authorized the suspension of the writ. It 
is understood that as the unlimited power 
is vested in Congress, the right to jvidge of 
the expediency of its exercise is, also, abso- 
lute in that body." — Sedgwick on Stai. and 
Const. Law, p. 598 ; Martin \s. Mott, 12 Wheat., 
p. 19. 

" But it is at any rate certain, that Con- 
gress, which has authorized the courts and 
judges of the United States to issue writs 
of habeas corpus, in cases within their juris- 
diction, can alone suspend their power, and 
that no State can prevent those judges from 
exercising their regular functions, which 
are, however, confined to imprisonment 
professed to be under the authority of the 
United States. But the State courts and 
judges possess the right of determining on 
the legality of imprisonment, under either 
authority." — Rawleon the Const., pp. 114, 115. 

" Hitherto, no suspension of the writ has 
ever been authorized by Congress since the 
establishment of the Constitution. It would 
seem as the power is given to Congress to 
suspend the writ of habeas corpus in cases of 
rebellion or invasion, that the right to 
judge whether the exigency had arisen, 
must exclusively belong to that body." — 2 
Story on Const, § 1342. 

The list of American authorities might 
be indefinitely extended; but these are 
deemed sufficient. 

The only instance in the history of the 
United States since the adoption of the 
present Constitution^ in which an effort was 
made, prior to the present insurrection, to 
procure a suspension of "the habeas corpus, 
occurred during the Administration of Mr. 
Jefl^'erson ; and, in that instance, the author- 
ity was conceded by all departments of the 
Government to reside in Congress. The 
President submitted the question to that 
body ; and they treated it as belonging 
without question to them." — See 3 Benton's 
Abridg. Debates in Congress, pp. 488-491 ; 504- 
515 ; and 520-542. 

The English authorities are not less de- 
cisive of the point in controversy ; for when- 
ever the king in the recess of Parliament 
imprisons ofi'enders, and denies them the 
privilege of the writ of habeas coipus, he is 
under the necessity of submitting his action 



to Parliament at its next session, and ask- 
ing an act of indemnity for what he has 
done. Otherwise, his officers and agents en- 
gaged in such unauthorized imprisonments 
of his subjects, would be held liable for the 
arrests so made. Such had been the prac 
tice in England for near a century before 
our Declaration of Independence. A dif- 
ferent course even in England, could not 
have been allowed without giving full sanc- 
tion to the frequently assumed, but almost 
constantly denied, prerogative of dispens- 
ing witli the laws of the land. The habeas 
corpus is the creature of law — originally of 
the old Common Law; but since the 31 
Car. II, of the Statute Law of England; 
and hence to allow its suspension by pro- 
clamation, would be to permit the King to 
dispense with the laws of the land. 

We can not better present the light in 
which these attempts on the part of the 
King to suspend this great vnAi are viewed 
by English statesmen, than by the follow- 
ing observations of Lord Brougham upon 
the subject: 

" This is a far worse measure," he ob- 
serves, "at all times than the restriction of 
public meetings; but the exercise of the 
power is, at least, under some check; for a 
bill of indemnity is always required to se- 
cure the government which has used such 
power of imprisonment; and, as the bill 
must be carried through after the alarm 
has passed away, possibly when a new min- 
istry is in office, they who have occasion 
for it, are exposed to considerable risk, 
if they have at all abused the power tem- 
porarily bestowed. I have conversed with 
ministers who have been parties to such 
proceedings; and I have invariably found in 
them a very natural, may I add also, a 
very wholesome aversion to the whole 
plan." — Brougham on the British Const, pp. 283 
and 284. 

In the language of Mr. Justice Wood- 
bury, "it would be a little extraordinary 
if the spirit of our institutions, both State 
and National, was not much stronger than 
in England against the" exercise of such 
powers. — 7 How. U. S. I. C. Rep., 62. 

It may be well questioned, we think, 
whether an American Congress possess au- 
thority to pass a valid act of indemnity in 
such case. Certain it is, it can not be done 
without a violation of the spirit of the 
Constitution, which prohibits the passage 
of e.v post facto laws and bills of attainder. 
There is little difference between subject- 
ing a man to punishment for an act, not 
criminal when committed; and dej^riving 
him of a remedy for a wrong done him, 
after his right to redress has accrued. 
An act of indemnity is, in such case, 
an act of injustice and oppression; and 
clearly within the spirit of the prohibition 
against ex post facto legislation. 

But while this objection to such legisla- 



68 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



tion lies in full force against it in this 
country, no such objection exists to it in 
England. There Parliament is omnipo- 
tent. No constitutional restraints are im- 
posed upon it. It has, at all times, all the 
power that we could confer upon a consti- 
tutional convention. Hence, it is entirely 
competent for it to give legal validity to an 
act that was before entirely illegal and void. 
Congress has no such omnipotence, however. 
Such power does not exist in this country, 
except in the hands of the people. 

We are, also, led to the same conclusion 
by the contemplation of the manner in 
which the executives of the two govern- 
ments have originated. In theory yet, and 
undoubtedly original in practice also, they 
start from different and absolutely oppo- 
site principles. 

The Government of Great Britain pro- 
ceeds from the King. He is the fons et origo 
of power, justice, and honor. He is im- 
mortal — can do no wrong — stands above the 
law. Acts of Parliament are acceded to 
by him in language which still implies, that 
he but grants the petition of the two 
houses of Parliament. Originally acts of 
Parliament not unfrequently became laws 
by being first presented to the King in the 
form of humble petitions on the part of the 
two Houses, the prayers whereof he was 
graciously pleased to grant. Such was the 
justly celebrated Petition of Right. An- 
other form, equally indicative of this claim 
of absolute power on the part of the King, 
is that of charters. In these the King 
speaks the law, thus: Dedimus et concessimus^ 
etc. — we give and grant, etc. Such is the 
style of the Magna Charta, and many other 
ancient statutes of England, still extant. 
This power of the King to gi'ant charters 
to corporations is still claimed as one of 
the royal prerogatives; and may, at any time, 
be exercised in the creation of new bodies 
politic. The great city of London derived 
its charter thus originally from the King ; 
and it was said to have been sealed by 
William the Conqueror, who granted it 
with wax, which was 

Bitten with his tooth 
In token of sooth. 

In order, however, more fully to grasp 
the whole vast extent of the power thus ex- 
ercised by the King in the granting of char- 
ters of government, it must be remembered 
that under them legishitive, judicial and ex- 
ecutive powers have been exercised amoun t- 
ing almost to absolute sovereignty. This 
is illustrated in the charter governments of 
America, one of which, since its separation 
from the parent country, has declared mar' 
iial law. But the power is far more grandly 
illustrated in the career of the East India 
Company — a corporation created by Queen 
Elizabeth, still existing, and ruling an 
Empire embracing vast territories in the 
fairest portions of the earth, and teeming 



with a population of more than a hundred 
million of souls. 

Starting thus with a ruler, in theory at 
least, if not in fact, absolute, we can only 
arrive at a knowledge of his present pow- 
ers and prerogatives by a careful study of 
what he has already granted to his Parlia- 
ment or people in the way of charters, peti- 
tions and acts of Parliament mjorojon'a/orwia. 
and in the private charters of different cor- 
porations, which have from time to time 
been created by him, both in Great Britain 
and other parts of his dominions. 

Whatever has been thus given away, he 
can not resume. It is in the hands of his 
subjects, and constitutes the body of their 
liberties. The perfect sphere of a power 
once absolute in his hands, has thus, as it 
were, undergone, through a succession of 
ages, a slow but constant disintegration, 
and the golden sands thereof have as con- 
stantly been gathered up and hoarded by 
his subjects, in whose hands they have be- 
come rights. Thus, according to the theory 
of the British Government, rights are the 
gifts of the crown to the people. Whatever 
has not been thus given, is still in the hands 
of the King — constitutes his prerogative. 

The Government of the United States, 
on the other hand, presents exactly the re- 
verse of this picture. It is the creature of 
the people, in whom all power is inherent. 
It can have no power which they have not 
conferred upon it, either by express grant, 
or by necessary implication. In order, 
therefore, to determine its powers, we have 
only to turn to the charter of its creation — 
the Constitution of the United States. A 
careful examination of that instrument will, 
we think, satisfy any candid mind that aU 
the implied powers conferred upon the Gov- 
ernment thereby must, in the first place, be 
ancillary to some substantive power ex- 
pressly granted ; and must, in the second 
place, whenever it is not a mere matter 
of form, become the subject of legisla- 
tion before it can be constitutionally ex- 
erted by any department. This view is, in 
our opinion, sustained by the language of 
the Constitution, in which these implied 
powers are supposed to be embraced. Thus, 
it is declared that '" Congress shall have 
power * * * to make all laws which 
shall be necessary and proper for carrying 
into execution the foregoing powers, and 
all other powers vested by this Constitu- 
tion in the Government of the United 
States, or in any department thereof" 

It is plain to our minds, from this lan- 
guage, that as often as the Executive may 
hnd his powers, as expressed in the Consti- 
tution, about to fail of their legitimate pur- 
poses for want of some ancillary power not 
expressly conferred, instead of seizing upon 
and exercising such necessary power with- 
out an act of Congress authorizing him to 
do so, that functionary must first aak Con- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



59 



gress for the required power. Otherwise, he 
transgresses a plain provision of the Consti- 
tution. For, if the power belonged to the 
Executive prior to the passage of a law, 
why was it provided that Congress should 
have power to make all laws which shall be 
necessary and proper for carrying into exe- 
cution the foregoing powers, and all other 
powers vested by this Constitution in the 
Government of the United States, or in any 
department thereof? If the President had 
a right to exercise the power in the first in- 
stance, why empower Congress to make the 
law necessary and proper to enable him to 
do so? 

It was, therefore, plainly not the inten- 
tion of the people that the President should 
exercise any implied powers. 

If we are right in this conclusion, then 
how can any one concede a right in the 
President, as ancillary to his executive 
functions, to suspend the privilege of the 
writ of habeas carpus'? If the King of Eng- 
land, all the vast residuum of power not 
embodied in charters, petitions granted, and 
acts of Parliament, must still look to an 
omnipotent Parliament — himself constitu- 
ting one equal and independent branch 
thereof — for authority to enable him to sus- 
pend the habeas corpus^ or indemnify his of- 
ficers when, by mere power, they have al- 
ready done so, shall we admit that a greater 
power over the priceless privilege of that 
writ, resides in the hands of the republican 
President of the United States ? And more 
especially we do so, when no such power is 
expressly granted him in the Constitution ; 
and when, by the fairest intendment, all im- 
plied powers are denied him, until conferred 
and made express by law ? 

But the privilege of the writ of habeas cor- 
pus is conferred by a law of the land. To 
allow the President to suspend it would, 
therefore, be to enable him to suspend a 
law of the land ; in other words, to legis- 
late. But, as Executive, he must see that 
the laws are faithfully executed ; and it is 
not for him to select what laws shall, and 
what laws shall not, be thus executed. All 
laws must stand alike to him, until, by sus- 
pension of one or more. Congress enables 
him to neglect or disregard those that are 
suspended, in his execution of the rest. 

The Act of Congress, of March 3, 1863, 
cited in our previous argument on this sub- 
ject, and the President's subsequent procla- 
mation in conformity therewith, are equiva- 
lent to a clear declaration that the power to 
suspend the habeas corpus does not originally 
reside with the Executive ; and as the 
President approved that act. and issvied that 
proclamation under it, we must hold that he 
now accepts the power from Congress, and 
does not claim it as properly pertaining to 
his function. If this were not the case, 
then his second proclamation was entirely 
unnecessary — a mere work of supereroga 



tion. If the proclamation of September 
24, 1862, had already suspended the privil- 
ege of the writ of habeas corpus, what occa- 
sion was there for the proclamation of the 
15th of September, 1863?— See 12 Stat at 
Large, App. pp. 6 and 7. 

Hence, we hold it established, that the 
President of the United States does not pos- 
sess an original constitutional authority to 
issue such a proclamation as that of Sep- 
tember 24, 1862, in so far as it relates to the 
suspension of the privilege of the writ of 
habeas corpus; because, 

1. Precedents, both English and Ameri- 
can, are against — precedents both legislative 
and judicial ; 

2. The King of England never exercises 
the power without going to Parliament for 
an act of indemnity, while it may be well 
questioned whether Congress has power to 
indemnify the President; 

3. The authority is not conferred upon 
the President by express ; and all implied 
powers are, by the terms of the Constitution,, 
denied him ; 

4. The habeas corpus exists by law. To 
suspend it is a legislative function ; and 
one plainly, therefore, not conferred upon 
the President ; and 

5. Congress by the act of March 3, 1863 ; 
and the President by his subsequent Pro- 
clamation, in pursuance thereof, in effect 
negatives the Proclamation of September 
24, 1862; and the assumption of authority 
by which the same was originally issued. 

But, arguing from the less to the greater — 
from 07ie of a species to all — we conclude, 
that if the President has not authority to 
suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas 
corpus, until it is conferred upon him by 
Congress, he can not have power to declare 
martial law. which we have seen is, for the 
time being, the suspension of all law, both 
Federal and State — municipal and constitu- 
tional. 

No lawyer will contend that the privilege 
of the writ of habeas corpus is placed upon 
higher ground by the Constitution, than 
any other constitutional privilege. On the 
contrary, it does not stand so high as any 
other ; for it is provided that it may be sus- 
pended, " when in case of invasion or rebel- 
lion, the public safety may require it." It 
stands alone subject to this contingency of 
suspension. All other privileges of the 
Constitution stand high above it therefore ; 
and yet we have seen it stands above the 
reach of Executive power until Congress in- 
tervenes. All other constitutional privileges 
stand above the reach even of Congress 
itself Among these vital elements of pop- 
ular freedom are placed the right of every 
citizen to be exempted from answering 
" for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, 
unless on presentment or indictment of a 
grand jury, except in cases arising in the 
iiand or naval forces," etc.; and that other 



60 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



great right parallel thereto, that " in all 
criminal prosecutions, the accused shall en- 
Joy the right to a speedy and public trial 
by an impartial jury of the State and dis- 
trict wherein the crime shall have been 
committed." etc. There is no provision for 
a suspension, in any contingency, of these 
sacred rights. The power that suspends 
them may, without any further stretch, 
overthrow every other constitutional and 
legal right. It can be done by no power 
derived from the Constitution ; for it strikes 
down and destroys its most sacred provis- 
ions. The people have never conferred any 
such power. Congress has never assumed 
to sanction it; but have, on the contrary, 
expressly provided a method by wliich the 
public safety may be secured, and the liberty 
■of the people preserved. The Act of March 
3, 1863, already so frequently cited, after 
providing for military arrests, and for the 
suspension of the privilege of the writ of 
habeas corpus, as to persons so arrested, pro- 
vides also for their trial in a strictly consti- 
tutional manner ; and, if they are not pre- 
sented or indicted by the grand jury of the 
proi^er district within twenty days after 
they have been reported to the proper Cir- 
cuit or District Court, or after they have 
been imprisoned, provided such grand jury 
shall, in the mean time, have closed its ses- 
sion, for their discharge ft'om such military 
custody, either absolutely or conditionally, 
according to the circumstances of each case. 
Here is an express limit, then, to the suspen- 
sion of the habeas corpus in ca&'e of such per- 
sons as the defendant; and an express pro- 
vision for their trial wholly incompatible, as 
we conceive, with the jurisdiction of this 
honorable Commission. 

It is, therefore, not within the constitu- 
tional authority of the President to declare 
martial law, and thereby deprive the defend- 
ant of his right to a constitutional trial by 
jury, upon an indictment duly presented 
by the proper grand jury. Congress has no 
power, under any known or conceivable 
state of afl'airs, to pass a valid act to deprive 
him of such a trial. Any such power, if it 
' exist at all, as part of the resources of our 
Government, iluist result to it from a pres- 
ent military necessity — a necessity in the 
presence of which the functions of Congress 
are suspended, and all the powers of civil 
government at an end. Then, and then only, 
when the laws are silenced by the din of 
arms, can such a power be admitted upon 
the public thoater; and it may be well 
questioned whether it is not to be regarded 
as rather the successor than the instrument 
of the Government whose constitutional 
organs have disappeared from the scene — 
whose constitutional functions have ceased. 

And this naturally brings us to the sec- 
ond proposition we are controverting, 
namely : 

2. Martial law is essential in the present 



emergency to the preservation of the na- 
tional life. 

In the discussion of this proposition, we 
were informed that " it is one of the innate 
l^rinciples of every existing thing, that it is 
endowed with the right to meet and over- 
come the force that seeks to destroy it." 
And this is true. But how endowed? 

The right of self-defense may legitimately 
call into play all tlie forces of the self to be 
defended. Has it any claim upon any more? 
any right to extrinsic aid ? " Every exist- 
ing thing" must exercise its right of self- 
defense according to tlie principles of its 
constitution; and it can not find one thing 
to defend, or one capability of defense out- 
side of its constitutional existence and 
power. The analogy to which the prosecu- 
tion thus appeals, is against the position in 
support of which it has been invoked. If 
it shall be said that it is not an argument 
from analogy ; but an argument from all, to 
one of the same kind — from "every existing 
thing" to the Government as one "existing 
thing," then it proves nothing at all; for 
the- question recurs upon us : How is the 
" existing thing" known as the Government 
of the United States endowed with the 
right to meet and overcome the force that 
seeks to destroy it? Plainly by virtue of 
its Constitution ; and only to the extent of 
its Constitution. Whenever this constitu- 
tional endowment ceases, there we are 
bound, according to the argument, to hold 
that its creator — the peojDle — intended it 
should cease to live. If it is not constitu- 
tionally qualified to make good the battle 
for its life without an entire subversion and 
destruction of its Constitution, then it must 
die. It may be well questioned whether an 
emergency requiring a declaration of mar- 
tial law in all parts of the United States at 
the same time, would not be equivalent to 
the death of the Republic. Indeed, we can 
not see how it could be otherwise. 

While we hold these opinions, we con- 
cede, on the other hand, that there may be 
large sections and districts of the country 
in such condition as to require the exercise 
of martial laiv. Wherever lawless force has 
subverted all other law, there this "rude 
substitute," known as martial law, may 
properly enter, and control the relations of 
persons to each other and to the Govern- 
ment, until the reign of law and order re- 
turns. Again, wherever lawless force con- 
fronts lawful force in martial array, and the 
contest of the two puts an end to the civil 
administration, th(>re martial laiv is called for 
and may properly be declared; or rather, it 
exists without any declaration at all. In 
tlie camp of an army in the field, or near 
the enemy, martial law may become neces- 
sary for the preservation of discipline, and 
thereby of the fidelity, and even of the ex- 
istence of such army. But in all such cases, 
the "existing thing" to be preserved Ls more 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



61 



immediately the army involved in the case 
than the Government ; and it must be re- 
membered that an army is always a mere 
instrument of force — and to martial law as 
the sum of organized force — for that end. 
But, even then, it can only take such an 
extreme step, when compelled to do so, by 
necessity — a present controlling necessity. 

Now upon this point, it seems to us, that 
the Judge Advocate has already conceded 
the question in dispute, for he says : " The 
Government stood on the brink of a preci- 
pice. The conspirators were foiled by the mili- 
tary power of the Government. * * * Self- 
preservation demanded that these men 
should be seized by the military power. 
Foreseeing thedanger, martial law had been declared 
by the President^ and military courts given juris- 
diction." Upon these sentences, which, we 
think, fairly represent the Judge Advocate, 
are we not entitled to say, that they do not 
imply a present necessity for martial law ? He 
informs us that " the Government stood," 
i. e., at some indefinite past time, ''upon 
the brink of a precipice." There is no pre- 
tense that such is its present condition 
owing to the defendant and his associates, 
for he declares that " the conspirators were 
foiled by the military authorities." How 
had they been foiled ? By being " seized by 
the military power." From all which it is 
plain that the necessity had passed, and 
that this defendant might safely have been 
delivered over for trial to the civil courts, 
which have never yet been closed in this 
district. But, if the necessity that led to 
the organized declaration of martial law 
did not exist at the commencement of this 
trial, or has since ceased to exist, the juris- 
diction of this Commission has ceased with 
it. But it seems that the President's decla- 
ration of martial law was prospective — to 
meet a necessity foreseen, but at the time 
non-existent. Now, granting the Presi- 
dent's power in proper circumstances — in 
the presence of an existing and controlling 
necessity — to declare martial law, it surely 
will not be contended that he may, without 
such present necessity, fulmine such a Pro- 
clamation in an anticipation of its future 
existence. 

In this view, then, the Proclamation was 
premature — two years almost in advance of 
the necessity in which alone it can find a 
valid excuse for appearing at all. Of course, 
it was not valid at its date, on the hypothe- 
sis of a present necessity, and being invalid 
then, it can not be revived for the present 
occasion. 

That the one sole ground upon which it 
IS competent for a military commander to 
declare martial laiv, is the existence of a 
present and controlling military necessity, 
we beg leave to oft'er some authorities: 

"The only principle which the law of 
England tolerates what is called martial hw, 
is necessity; its introduction can be justified 



only by necessity ; and its continuance re- 
quires precirsely the same justification of 
necessity; and, if it survive the necessity 
in which alone it rests, for a single minute, 
it becomes instantly a mere exercise of law- 
less violence. When foreign invasion or 
civil war renders it impossible for courts oi' 
law to sit, or to enforce the execution of 
their judgments, it becomes necessary to 
find some rude substitute for them, and to 
employ for that purpose the military, which 
is the only remaining force in the commun- 
ity. While the laws are silenced by the 
noise of arms, the rulers of the armed force 
must punish, as equitably as they can, those 
crimes which threaten their own safety ; 
but no longer — every moment beyond is 
usurpation. As soon as the laws can act, 
every other mode of punishing supposed 
crimes is itself an enormous crime. If ar- 
gument be not enough on this subject — if, 
indeed, the mere statement be not evidence 
of its own truth — I appeal to the highest 
and most venerable authority known to our 
law. ' Martial laiv,' says Sir Matthew Hale, 
' is not a law, but something indulged rather 
than allowed as a law. The necessity of 
government, order, and discij^line in an 
army, is that only which can give it counte- 
nance. Necessitas enim, quod cogit, defendit.' — 
Sir Jame^ MachintosK s Miscellaneous Essays and 
Speeches. Gary and Hart's edition, p. 540. 

"Suppose," says Lord Brougham, "I were 
ready to admit that on the j^ressure of a 
great emergency, such as invasion or rebel- 
lion, when there is no time for the slow and 
cumbrous proceedings of the civil law, a 
proclamation may justifiably be issued for 
excluding the ordinary tribunals, and di- 
recting that oftenses should be tried by a 
military court — such proceedings might be 
justified by necessity ; but it could rest on 
that alone. Created by necessity, necessity 
must limit its continuance. It would be 
the worst of all conceivable grievance — it 
would be a calamity unspeakable — if the 
whole law and Constitution of England 
were suspended one hour longer than the 
most imperious necessity demanded. * ■" 
* * * * I know that the proclamatioi 
of martial law renders every man liable to 
be treated as a soldier. But the instant the 
necessity ceases, that instant the state of 
soldiership ceases, that instant the rights, 
with the relations of civil life, ought to be 
restored. * * Only mark the dilemma 
in which the Governor might have found 
himself placed by his own acts. The only 
justification of the court-martial was the Pro- 
clamation. Had that court sat at the mo- 
ment of danger, there would have been 
less ground of complaint against it. But it 
did not assemble until the emergency had 
ceased; and it then sat for eight-and-twenty 
days. Supi^ose a necessity had existed at 
the commencement of the trial, but that, in 
the course of the eight-and-twenty days, it 



62 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



had ceased ; suppose a necessity had existed 
in the first week, who could predict that it 
would not cease before the second ? If it 
had ceased with the first week of the trial, 
what would have been the situation of the 
Governor ? The sitting of the court-martial 
at all, could be justified only by the proclama- 
tion of martial law ; yet it became the duty 
of the Governor to revoke that proclama- 
tion. Either, therefore, the court-martial 
must be continued without any warrant or 
color of law, or the proclamation of martial 
law must be continued only to legalize the 
prolonged existence of the court-martial. 
If, at any moment before its proceedings 
were brought to a close, the urgent pressure 
had ceased, which alone justified their 
being instituted, according to the assump- 
tion I am making in favor of the court, and 
for the Governor's sake; then to continue 
martial law one hour longer would have been the 
most grievous oppression, the plainest violation of 
all law." — Speeches of Lord Brougham, vol. 1, 
pp. 390, 391. 

It is distinctly said by the Supreme Court 
of the United States, in the case of Jjuther 
vs. Borden^ 7 How., pp. 46 and 47, that " no 
more force can be used than is necessary 
to accomplish the object,"' under a declara- 
tion of martial law. From this we infer 
that the same rule must apply to the adop- 
tion of force — martial law — in the first in- 
stance. 

"In time of war, by reason of the neces- 
sity of it, he" — the King — "useth absolute 
power, so that his word is law;" and this is 
martial law — "the law of war." — Smith on the 
English Republic, supra. And Hale says it 
is "indulged" on account "of the necessity," 
etc. It was never, the same author assures 
us, "so much indulged as intended to be 
executed, or exercised upon others" than 
soldiers. "For others who were not en- 
listed under the army had no color or rea- 
son to be bound by military constitutions, 
applicable only to the army whereof they 
were not parts. But they were to be or- 
dered and governed according to the laws 
to which they were subject, though it were 
a time of war. * * * The exercise of 
martial law, whereby any person should lose 
his life, or member, or liberty, may not be 
permitted in time of peace, when the 
King's courts are open for all persons to re- 
ceive justice according to the laws of the 
land. This is in substance declared by 
the Petition of Right, 3 Oar. I, whereby 
such commissions and martial law were re- 

f)ealed, and declared to be contrary to 
aw." — Hale's His. of the Common Law, pp. 
54 and 55. 

Thus, it appears that a controlling mili- 
tary necessityalone can afford a just ex- 
cuse for a declaration of martial law — a ne- 
cessity that closes the civil courts of jus- 
tice, or prevents the enforcement of their 
judgments by the or^Ainary process. Mili- 



tary necessity has been defined by the Gov- 
ernment in General Orders, No. 100, 1863, 
to "consist in the necessity of those meas- 
ures which are indispensable for securing 
the ends of the war," etc. 

Has any such controlling necessity ex- 
isted in the present instance? Does it still 
exist? Have the courts been closed and 
the laws silenced by the din of arms? Are 
they still closed? If not, then, we think, 
we are authorized to say that no necessity has 
existed, or still exists, for declaring wiar^/a^^aw, 
for suspending the constitutions and laws, 
and proceeding against citizens charged with 
high crimes and misdemeanors in a manner 
never before resorted toin this country since 
the first settlement at Jamestown and Ply- 
mouth ; and one wholly disused in England 
since the abdication of James II. 

It is the fact of the civil courts being 
open, and justice having its ordinary course, 
that distinguishes a state of peace in any 
country from a state of war; and to this 
etiect Lord Chief Justice Coke lays down 
the law. He says: "When the courts of 
justice are open, and the judges and minis- 
ters of the same may by law protect men 
from oppression and violence, and distri- 
bute justice to all, it is said to be a time of 
peace. So when by invasions, insurrections, 
rebellions, etc., the peaceable course of 
justice is disturbed and stopped, so as the 
courts of justice be, as it were, shut up, 
then it is said to be a time of war." — See 
Coke upon Littleton, 249, b. n. 1; and Viner's 
Abridgment, tit. Prcerogative, (L. a.) War. 

In view of this great authority, is not 
this a time of peace in Indiana, at least in 
so far as the administration of justice is con- 
cerned ? If it is a time of war, it can not be 
said, in that respect, to be made so by the 
rebellion — by any act of the common en- 
emy. The courts are open, and "the peace- 
able course of justice is not disturbed and 
stopped." But if it be a time of peace, if 
" the courts are open for all persons to receive 
justice according to the laws of the land," 
then according to Lord Hale, supra, " the 
exercise of martial law, whereby any person 
should lose his life, or member, or liberty, 
may not be permitted;" and this is in sub- 
stance declared by the Petition of Right, 
3 Car. I, whereby such commissions of 
martial law were repealed, and declared to 
be contrary to law. And accordingly was 
that famous case of Edmond, Earl of Kent, 
who being taken at Pomfort, 15 Edw. 11, 
the King and divers lords proceeded to 
give sentence of death against him, as in 
a kind of military court, by a summary 
proceeding, which judgment was afterward, 
in 1 Edw. Ill, reversed in Parliament." 

* * "For viartial law, which is rather 
indulged than allowed, and that only in 
cases of necessity, in open war, is not per- 
mitted in time of peace, when the ordinary 
courts of justice are open." 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



63 



But even if this were a time of " open 
war," and "the ordinary courts" of law 
"were shut up," and the "peaceable course 
of justice disturbed and stopped," so that 
"the judges and ministers of the same 
may" not, "by law, protect men from op- 
pression and violence, and distribute jus- 
tice to all," has the Government of the 
United States taken the necessary steps to 
the enforcement of martial law, according 
to the usages of war ? It will not be de- 
nied that the Duke of Wellington under- 
stood as well as any man of his times, the 
duties and rights of a military commander 
in this respect. His whole great life was 
devoted to the profession of arms; and the 
administering of governments according 
to the rules and usages of war. Speak- 
ing upon this subject, he says: "In fact 
7nartial law is no law at all. Therefore the 
general who declares martial law, and com- 
mands it to be carried into execution, is 
bound to lay down distinctly the rules, and 
regulations and limits according to which his 
will is to be carried out." — Hansard, supra. 

Now, if martial law has been declared, 
and is in force in the whole United States, 
as claimed by the Judge Advocate, we have 
been able to find no order whereby the 
President, Lieutenant General, or others 
acting under either, have laid "down dis- 
tinctly;" or, indeed, at all, "the rules, regu- 
lations and limits according to which his" 
or their "will is to be carried out." If this 
is not done, the declaration of martial law 
must become a snare to entrap the un- 
wary; and, indeed, the wary also; for 
where the law resides in the breast of the 
ruler until it alights upon its subject in the 
form of a prosecution for a "capital or 
otherwise infamous crime," the good have 
no assurance of safety above the evil. All 
are alike insecure. Such a system would 
be worse than that of the Emperor Caligula 
who wrote his edicts in a small character, 
and hung them on high pillars the more 
eflfectually to ensnare his subjects. 

6. But that it may not be said that we 
have overlooked the military character 
and power of the President, we beg leave to 
say, that this discussion has proceeded upon 
a consideration of his entire character; 
and if this method of considering his pow- 
-ers, is not so clear as one founded on the 
separation of his character and powers as 
a civil magistrate, from those belonging to 
him as the commander of the arrny and 
navy, we have been led into it by the 
method in which that functionary himself 
has proceeded in the exercise of those 
powers. Thus, the Proclamation relied 
upon in this prosecution as a declaration of 
martial law, was originally issued from the 
office of the Secretary of State; and is 
published with the acts of Congress, as an 
ordinary civil document of the kind. Had 
the President not given us evidence of the 



fact, that he is in the habit of distinguish- 
ing between his war powers and his civil 
functions, this course might not have led 
us to regard' the Proclamation in the light 
of a purely civil act. But it is well known 
that he has issued several war orders 
purely as such. Hence, we had a right to 
look to the War office, and not to that of 
State, for so important an order as that 
which declares all the provisions of the 
Constitution and the laws suspended ; and 
martial law — the President's mere will — sub- 
stituted therefor. If the Proclamation is 
not a war order resulting from a paramount 
and controlling military necessity, then we 
submit, it is not, and can not, possibly be a 
declaration of martial law; and so we con- 
tend, martial law has not been in force, and 
can not be under it. 

If it be regarded as a war order and in 
force at its date, has it not been since re- 
scinded by act of Congress? We think it 
clearly has been, provided the legislative 
function of the Government has not been 
suspended by its operation ; and it would 
seem from the President's recognition of Con- 
gress, as not suspended, by delivering to 
both Houses thereof sundry messages; by 
approving their acts; and, in some in- 
stances, by afterward acting upon laws 
passed by them, that he still regards the 
national legislature as still existing and in 
full life and power. If it is, then it may 
prescribe rules to govern the exercise of 
his power as Commander-in-Chief of the 
Army and Navy. It may say how far he 
shall declare martial law; and where his 
power, in that respect, shall cease. And 
this it has done. 

The power to suspend the writ of habeas 
corpus Congress have already given him, if, 
indeed, they have power to delegate that dis- 
cretion — a proposition not involved in this 
discussion ; but one which we should other- 
wise controvert upon authority. That sus- 
pension, however, of the writ of habeas cor- 
pus, while it provides for military arrests 
and imprisonments, is not coupled with 
any power of military trials. On the con- 
trary, it is expressly provided that a trial, 
in case of military imprisonmentSj shall 
not be postponed indefinitely; but shall be 
had at the next term of the proper Circuit 
or District Court, provided the grand jury 
of the district find an indictment; and if 
not, then that such court shall, upon proper 
application made, discharge persons so im- 
prisoned, either absolutely or conditionally. 
Here, then, is a legal limit to the Presi- 
dent's power even to imprison; and a clear 
denial of his right to punish, by military 
law, such offenders against the United 
States. He approved this limitation upon 
his power, as asserted in the Proclamation 
upon which alone it is contended this pros- 
ecution can proceed. It, is therefore, 
plainly rescinded, if it ever was valid. And 



64 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



we desire to observe that the law which 
does this, expressly refers to the same 
classes of persons declared subject to mar- 
tial lato by the Proclamation of September 
24, 1862; and provides, as already said, for 
their trial, or discharge from custody, by 
the ordinary civil tribunals. — Act of Congress 
of March 3, 1863—12 Stat, at large, p. 766, 
§§ 2, 3 et seq. 

We conclude, therefore, that martial law 
does not now exist in the State of Indiana; 
and, in fact, never has so existed; because, 

1. It was not competent for the President 
to declare, or proclaim it ; 

2. If it ever were proclaimed, the Proclar 
mation has been rescinded by act of Con- 
gress, with the full approval of the Presi- 
dent. 

And, as the existence of martial law is 
conceded to be necessary to the jurisdiction 
of this court, we conclude, therefore, that 
this court has no jurisdiction of the defend- 
ant upon the charges and specifications now 
pending against him. 

[Of questions of the second and third 
classes, namely : 

II. In relation of the liability of the de- 
fendant to be tried before any court for 
some of the ofienses alleged against him ; 

III. In relation to the nature and suffi- 
ciency of the evidence adduced against him 
to support the charges. 

These two classes of questions are here 
considered together.] 

^Ir. M. M. Kay continued the argument, 
as follows : 

In approaching the evidence of the case, 
we are almost subdued and awed into si- 
lence, by considering the perilous precipice 
on which society, in the North-west, so 
lately hung, if the testimony, in the plenti- 
tude of its details, or even in its general 
scope, is to be believed. But, when we con- 
sider that much of that evidence is open to 
criticism from the perfidious relations which 
one or more of the witnesses bore to the 
defendant, and especially that the evidence 
is entirely ex parte, we are reassured that an 
exalted duty rests still upon us, as well as 
upon this Court, to analyze the testimony 
and apply it to the case according to the 
eternal and unchangeable rules of justice, of 
truth, and of good faith; even though the 
defendaiit may have fled from the perils of 
his situation. And just here we beg to en- 
ter our protest against the dangerous legal 
heresy that the escape of a defendant dur- 
ing trial and before judgment, carries with 
it any inference of either law or fact preju- 
dicial to his innocence. The most that can 
be predicated of the fact is, that he has 
waived his constitutional right to be present, 
in person, for the remainder of tlie trial — 
leaving the whole question of his guilt or 
innocence, intact, before the Court to the 
same extent as if he had chosen to remain 
absent from Court in his prison. To this 



extent, the cases cited from Seventh Ohio, 
Fourteenth and Sixteenth Indiana go, and no 
further. Such absence gives no additional 
weight to the Government's testimony. 
Such absence is no confession of guilt. 
Such absence, whether by escape from cus- 
tody, or by voluntary absence in his prison, 
only waives his right to be present at the 
trial and at the rendition of judgment, in 
the civil tribunals, but it waives no legiti- 
mate matter of defense — no defects of law 
or evidence in the case which the Govern- 
ment has made. We will be pardoned, 
therefore, for dwelling with emphasis in 
denial of this most unwarrantable assump- 
tion. The most obvious and intelligible 
manner of treating the charges against the 
defendant and applying to them the evi- 
dence, is to consider, first, the charges 
and specifications based simply on the sup- 
posed character of the secret organization 
of which the defendant was a member, and 
the evidence applicable to the same — and, 
secondly, the charges and specifications 
based on the extraneous acts and declara- 
tions of defendant and the evidence in 
their support. To deny that the defendant 
was a member of a secret political society 
of the name charged, would be to ask the 
Court to discredit- the only corroborated 
testimony in the case. So it may be ac- 
cepted as true, that there was such a society, 
and that the defendant was a member, and 
at the head of the organization in this 
State. But we deny that the organization 
was, by its framework, rituals, written and 
unwritten work, a conspiracy, as the specifi- 
cations assume. We also deny, in the light 
of the evidence, that the order is intrin- 
sically disloyal or treasonable, however 
vicious and unjustifiable it may be on gen- 
eral principles, in other respects, and how- 
ever bad and ambitious men may pervert 
and use it to surprise a misguided society 
and betray into the great crime of conspi- 
racy, insurrection and treason. If we can 
feel justified in assuming this position, in 
the light of the ex parte case made by the 
Government, how much more fortified we 
would feel, were we at liberty to draw on 
the supposed support which rebutting testi- 
mony might have furnished us? We feel 
warranted, from the evidence, in saying 
that the Order of the Sons of Liberty did 
not spring at once from chaos, nor from the 
plastic hands of one man or council of 
men, but, in its present framework and pro- 
portions, it is the symmetrical edifice of three 
years of experiment, change, failure, and 
elaborate reconstruction. Starting from the 
rude home-made order of self-protection, 
thence matured into the " Circle of Honor," 
" Knights of the Golden Circle," thence into 
the " American Knights," and finally into 
the " Sons of Liberty." Springing at first 
from real or fancied necessity, it was at first 
a crude, immature, stupid, and in many re 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



65 



Epects a ridiculous imposture and a gross 
political fraud on the credulity of unsophis- 
ticated people. Still, in all, or any of these 
stages and changes, we look in vain for the 
criminal element, or conspiracy, or treason. 
The members glided from one name into 
another without any conscious change of 
purpose oi' character, and without assuming 
any new obligations, or realizing any shame 
or criminality by virtue of the change. 
Hence, the conclusion forces itself upon our 
minds that there was neither conspiracy or 
treason in the written work of the order, per 
se ; nor was there any treason or conspiracy 
in the unwritten work of the order, for the 
mass of the members, without any new 
light, passed from one stage of the order to 
another, believing it only a political society. 
So, if we are right in this, the first, second, 
and third specifications of charge first, fall, 
as they are based on the theory that the 
organization is, joer se, a conspiracy. In saying 
this much, we do not forget that the evi- 
dence shows much loose and unreliable 
hearsay, in regard to the purposes of the 
order in certain localities; but then we re- 
member at the same time, and this Court 
will not fail to recollect, that all this testi- 
mony comes from the three witnesses, viz. : 
from Warren county, Illinois, Martin county, 
Indiana, and Eandolph county, Indiana, and 
in the case of the latter two, from men who 
only knew the " Knights of the Golden 
Circle ;" an organization without system, 
uniformity, community of creed, and with- 
out national, state or county head to the 
organization. The defendant can not be 
held responsible for any light, trivial, loose 
or wanton utterances of irresponsible, discon- 
nected associations, whose names are not 
even mentioned in any of the charges. We 
do not feel called upon, as counsel for the 
defendant, to apologize for these or any 
other secret political organizations, and es- 
pecially in revolutionary times like these. 
But we do feel called upon as a mark of 
respect to this Court, and in the interest of 
a common country, to place on record our 
unqualified reprobation of all secret politi- 
cal orders, by whatever name or party affili- 
ation, as, at best, but pestilential hotbeds 
for the most incendiary political heresies, 
leading to the worst fruits of Jacobinism. 
It is in vain for the purest and wisest pa- 
triot to offer words of truth and patriotism 
to the people, if they conflict with the de- 
crees of a secret, irresponsible, bloody tribu- 
nal. Through the machinery of secret or- 
ganizations, the worthless and irresponsible 
place-hunters come to the top, get the 
popular ear, and have nioi'e weight and 
influence in directing the popular mind, 
than all the lessons of history, or the ap- 
peals of our most learned, independent, 
unselfish and trusted public men. Who, 
then, that has had the sagacity to detect 
the baleful influence of secret societies in 



the whole political atmosphere for two 
years past, can find any apology or palliation 
for them? We offer none. It would be 
too much labor to go into the evidence in 
detail, so we can but classify it, and be con- 
tent with very general observations in its 
application. If we have not erred in the 
foregoing speculations in regard to the char- 
acter of the order, tlien the specifications, 
Nos. I, 2 and 3, of charge first, are in no 
wise proved. For we may observe that it is 
not competent to fix the character of the 
order as treasonable in Indiana, by produc- 
ing an obligation of a highly objectionable 
character, thi'ough a member of a different 
order, in a particular locality, in the State of 
Illinois, when the printed ritual of the 
whole order in Indiana is in evidence con- 
taining no such obligations. This remark 
applies to Wm. Clayton, a witness from 
Warren county, Illinois, and it applies with 
equal force to the verbal testimony of the 
witnesses from Martin and Randolph coun- 
ties, in this State, whose experience relates 
to irregular organizations anterior to the 
existence of the "Sons of Liberty," and 
revelations have no warrant in the ritual of 
that order, in this State. How can Dodd be 
held responsible for the insane ravings of 
persons with whom he had no connection ? 
For it will be steadily borne in mind, that, 
before the defendant can be chargeable with 
the dictations and acts of others in this or 
any other order, the evidence must estab- 
lish the essential preliminary fact thc.t the 
order is, per se, a conspiracy, for it travels on 
the ground that they are co-conspirators. 
We leave the fourth specification of charge 
first, as falling within class of charges based 
on positive independent acts, and pass to 
charge second. The four specifications of 
charge second, charge treason, if any thing. 
The task of disposing of the whole of this 
charge is easy. 

By article 3d, of section 3d, Constitution 
of United States, it is provided that ''No 
person shall be convicted of treason unless 
on the testimony of two witnesses to the 
same overt act." We submit, with entire 
confidence, that no overt act has been 
proved by even one witness. It is true, the 
witness, Stidger. talks vaguely about the 
" order " having patronized the Greek fire 
machine, and about the burning of Govern- 
ment stores ; all of which was mere hearsay, 
coming from Bowles, which is not admissi- 
ble against defendant, except on the suppo- 
sition that the order is a conspiracy — and 
even then it would only have the force of 
one witness, if that. 

The same logic disposes of the same wit- 
ness' testimony in regard to the starting of 
couriers into Kentucky to give notice of the 
culmination of the scheme ; but the cour- 
iers were never started. All the specifica- 
tions of charge third, we suppose, fail for 
want of proof We do not remember any 



66 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



evidence on the subject of arming and in- 
citing the people to insurrection, except 
what tends to support the fourth specifica- 
tion of charge first, involving a conspiracy 
to put on foot an insurrection. The evi- 
dence in regard to the arms bought in New 
York, and shipped to one Parsons, does not 
connect the defendant in any degree with 
that transaction. The evidence of all the 
witnesses touching the arming of the order 
is very unsatisfactory and inconclusive, even 
in the irregular local organizations. And 
as to supposed insurrectionary character of 
the defendant's official addresses and casual 
speeches, we have only to suggest that there 
is not now, never was, and in the nature of 
things never can be, any test or standard of 
legitimate debate. Where the press and 
speech are as free as they have been in this 
country in the past, more or less abuse and 
licentiousness must exist, and must be tole- 
rated. And it is respectfully submitted as 
a sound maxim in statesmanship, and a safe 
guide for legislators and courts, that great 
errors and abuses in this respect may be 
safely tolerated, if reason is left free to com- 
bat them. Why shall the defendant be ar- 
raigned for insurrectionary appeals, while 
the carnival of licentious utterance goes on 
all around us? Power, in all ages, has been 
jealous of a free press. While on this sub- 
ject, we conceive that we can do our client 
and country no better service than to com- 
mend to the attention of the Court an elo- 
quent passage from the speech of the great 
English orator, Sheridan, on the liberty of 
the press. 

Mr. Sheridan says: "Give me but the lib- 
erty of the press, and I will give the Minis- 
ter a venal House of Peers — I will give him 
a corrupt and servile House of Commons — 
I will give him full swing of the patron- 
age of office — I will give him the whole 
host of ministerial influence — I will give 
him all the power that place can confer up- 
on him to purchase submission, and over- 
awe resistance; and yet, armed with the 
liberty of the press, I will go forth to meet 
him undismayed ; I will attack the mighty 
fabric he has reared with that mightier en- 
gine ; I will shake down from its hight, cor- 
ruption, and lay it beneath the ruins of the 
abuses it was meant to shelter." 

There are five specifications under charge 
fourth, for "disloyal practices;" a charge 
suggestive of boundless elasticity, and an 
illimitable field of inquiry. What is a dis- 
loyal practice ? When we say that no law 
has defined it, no court has expounded it, 
and no precedent has illustrated it, we have 
shown the dangerous character of a convic- 
tion under that charge. 

As to the two specifications under charge 
fifth, for a violation of the laws of war, is it 
not enough for us to say, that the defend- 
ant was not in the military or naval service 
of the United States, and that if the rules 



and articles of war are meant, he owes no 
duty to them; and that if the international 
common law of war is meant, then it can 
only relate to the rights and duties of bel- 
ligerent powers, and not to the rights and 
duties of government and citizen. We 
have now traversed over all the charges, and 
recur to the fourth sjsecification of charge 
first. If the evidence establishes any spe- 
cification, it is the one under consideration. 
This charge rests, not upon the supposed 
treasonable character of the order, but up- 
on extrinsic testimony of particular facts, 
and those facts consisting of admissions and 
communications made by defendant to a 
Government Detective by the name of 
Stidger. If this witness' testimony is to be 
taken without any deduction, it would con- 
vict the defendant of a willingness to commit 
murder, as well as treason. The witness 
appears to be an intelligent and accom- 
plished detective, and all the more danger- 
ous on that account, unless strictly honest 
and impartial. A professional detective is 
quickened by the same instincts, and stim- 
ulated by the same motives, that influence 
even the better class of practicing lawyers 
in their zealous pursuit of the interest of a 
client. Such a detective starts out with 
hope, pride and professional ambition, all 
involved in his success in making a case 
against some one. His zeal leads him into 
every .species of sham intrigue ; his strategy 
leads into the confidence of the ambitious, 
the vain, the visionary, or the corrupt, and 
he sedulously cultivates the germ of every 
prurient weakness to folly, ambition or 
crime, so that in the end he has deliberately 
manufactured half the circumstances of 
guilt, and stands before God a joint criminal 
with the accused — standing with a guilt of 
twofold enormity — the guilt of treachery 
and dishonor in betraying the confidence of 
his dupe, and the guilt of an accomplice in 
the crime itself Or, to say the least of it, 
in every case he stands dishonored in the 
eyes of those he has betrayed, and when 
honor is lost, truth holds precarious sway. 
Honor and truth are the Siamese Twins ; if 
you sever the ligament that binds them, 
they sicken and die together. 

The scheme of murder and insurrection 
developed in that evidence is most atrocious 
and revolting, and whatever visionary 
schemes of ambition and adventure may 
have entered into the calculations of the de- 
fendant, we can not believe that murder 
was one of them. And although it consti- 
tutes no part of the charges on which he is 
tried, and although a conspiracy in aid of 
the rebellion is a crime of sufficiently dark 
a hue, we would fain vindicate his charac- 
ter from the infamy of a foul murder — a 
deed so foreign and repulsive to every ele- 
ment of his nature. But the evidence to 
support this degrading accusation is sup- 
plied by the same detective, and by the ab- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



67 



rupt termination of the trial, has denied us 
even the chance to disprove what is said to 
have taken place in open council in reference 
to the assassination of Coffin. And, indeed, 
the Court will be bound to receive all the 
evidence of the witness Stidger, with all 
that hesitation and doubt to which the 
treacherous relations which the witness bore 
to the defendant, expose it, and subject to 
the force of the fact of the abrupt and un- 
expected termination of the trial, operating 
with exclusive detriment to the defense. If 
the Court find the defendant guilty on this 
specification, it will be by giving full force 
and credit to the witness Stidger, and by 
taking a different view from us as to the 
true standard that measures the character 
of a professional detective, and weighs the 
credibility of his testimony. If we have 
not done injustice to the position of that 
class of witnesses, he stands not only dis- 
honored, as taking all the obligations and 
vows of secrecy of the order, with the de- 
liberate and premeditated purpose to violate 
these oaths, and to betray his comrades, but 
he stands, by virtue of his own machina- 
tions, progressing step by step to the clear 
and confessed relations of an accomplice, 
■morally and legally. The rule of law upon 
the subject is, that while the testimony of 
an accomplice is to be received, yet it should 
be received with great caution, and when 
received, is entitled to less weight than the 
testimony of other witnesses. — See 2 Ind., 
652; 4 Ind., 128; 7 Ind., 326; 9 Ind, 106. 

With much solicitude and anxiety, we 
■commit the cause of the defendant, in his 
absence, to the learning, to the patriotism, 
to the honor, and to the justice of this 
Court. To the learning, because the great 
legal question of jurisdiction, lying at the 
threshold of your inquiries, is still open; 
to your patriotism, because the highest in- 
terests of public liberty, and the victory of 
reason over passion, are in ,your hands ; to 
your honor, because the graces of magna- 
nimity and mercy should follow the weak, 
the unfortunate, and even the guilty, and 
plead against the calamities of conviction ; 
to your justice, because she sits blind to the 
scenes of our national drama, unseduced by 
the blandishments of power, and deaf to 
the cries of resentment and passion. 
M. M. RAY, 
J. W. GORDON, 
Counsel for H. H. Dodd. 

REPLY OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE. 

Gentlemen of the Coynmission : 

I do not propose to go into an extended 
argument upon the question of jurisdic- 
tion. The Commission having already passed 
upon that question, it would be a vain and use- 
less labor for me to collate and review all 
the decisions and authorities that might be 
brought to bear upon that question. It is 
not necessary to occupy the time of the 



Commission in making an argument simply 
to meet what the gentlemen may say upon 
their side, for the arguments made by the 
counsel here, are not those of the accused, 
and are received by the Commission merely 
as a matter of courtesy, and, therefore, do 
not force me to take issue upon what they 
personally may place before you. I, how- 
ever, desire to submit, very briefly, one or 
two points, and then leave the case with you. 

On the question of jurisdiction, volumes 
might be written, and digests innumerable 
compiled. The question of martial law 
has, for centuries past, been a subject of 
thoughtful consideration by the ablest 
jurists; what it was, and what were the 
necessities that justified it. Martial law is 
born of necessity, and it is but a matter of 
opinion and judgment as to when that ne- 
cessity exists. He who is to judge of that 
necessity, is the chief executive power of 
any government, or the subordinate milita- 
ry officers acting under the orders of that 
executive. 

All the argument in the case resolves 
itself into one proposition, namely : that 
martial law can only exist, and does only 
exist, in times of great, controlling, over- 
powering necessity. Martial law, as has 
been well said, is a setting aside of the 
whole machinery;of the civil law. The civil 
law must go down before it, and nothing 
but a great and all-powerful necessity should 
be permitted to take from the people of any 
land the rights, privileges and immunities 
of the civil law. And who shall be the 
judge of that necessity ? It can only be 
the Chief Executive who wields the mili- 
tary power of any government. Congress 
can not be the judge. Our legislative body. 
Congress, usually convenes but once a year, 
not oftener than twice a year, and, in times 
of foreign war, invasion or rebellion, shall 
we wait the expiration of that year for the 
declaration of martial law, to preserve the 
life of the Government? Such a course 
would be suicidal and destructive of the 
Government itself The statement of the 
proposition shows its absurdity. If the ne- 
cessity for action should arise between the 
sessions of the legislative body, where is the 
power that must step in to save the Govern- 
ment before that legislative body meets ? 
The circumstances of the times necessitate 
martial law, and when this necessity exists, 
martial law must be proclaimed, and the 
civil law, for the time being, remains silent, 
to be revived in its native force when the 
necessity for proclaiming martial law shall 
have passed away. The civil law sleeps ; it 
is not dead. 

In this case the President has not said 
that martial law shall be proclaimed through 
the length and breadth of the land. On 
this point the counsel for the accused have 
gone astray. The President has not de- 
clared that the whole machinery of the civil 



68 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



law sball remain dormant, that there shall 
not be any punishment of civil offenses in 
our courts. But he has said, that when men 
step in and undertake to assist tliis great 
rebellion, by acting in concert with these 
armed rebels against tlie Government, thus 
threatening the Hie of the nation, that they 
then clothe themselves with a certain mili- 
tary garb that brings them within military 
law, and that the military law shall act upon 
them, and thus far martial law is proclaimed; 
no further. When men, for instanca, here 
in the State of Indiana, undertake to bring 
about an insurrection, undertake to release 
and arm these hordes of rebel prisoners, 
here in our midst, they then become part 
and i^arcel of that rebel army, and make 
themselves subject to military law. They 
are as soldiers for the time being, and, like 
them, subject to military regulations. Take 
the case as it exists. We are engaged in a 
war ; and the ways of war are not the ways 
of peace. That which may be lawful in 
times of war is unlawful in times of peace. 
Let me illustrate. Would it be lawful in 
times of peace for the military commander 
of this district to go out to the ground on 
which Camp Morton now stands, and take 
possession of five hundred acres of land on 
which to build structures, in which to con- 
fine these rebel soldiers? Would it, in times 
of peace, be lawful for him to seize and take 
possession of a house to occupy as his head- 
quarters ? Would it be lawful for him to 
go upon another man's land, and camp his 
troops, and seize his corn and provisions ? 
Would not each single act be a trespass, for 
which he would be liable to prosecution ? 
But it is no crime under the circumstances 
supposed, that is in times of war. And it is 
no higher assertion of military authority to 
take possession of the person, than it would 
be to seize that person's property for mili- 
tary service, if the safety of the Government 
demanded it. All these things come as a 
concomitant to a state of war. Again, in 
times of peace, do we recognize or know of any 
such officer as the Commanding General of a 
Department? Take, for instance, the Com- 
manding General of this Department, Gen- 
eral Hooker, who commands the States of 
Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan — not 
one of which States is in rebellion; what are 
his powers and duties? Is he simply a 
man of straw? Is his position recognized 
by the civil law ? And yet will any man 
claim that he can be prosecuted for any acts 
done in the exercise of his authority, not 
one of which is recognized by the civil law, 
and but for the condition of war, would be 
without legal sanction. The position of 
General Hovey is another illustration. At 
present he exercises in his military super- 
vision as much power over the people of the 
State as the Governor himself, and yet in 
times of peace, his office has no existence. 
If peace were declared to-day, he would be 



as powerless as any private citizen in the 
land. It is because the foundations of so- 
ciety are broken up, that we are forced to 
recognize the necessities that grow out of 
this new order of things. The state of 
things now existing in this country, has 
never before been exactly paralleled in any 
age of the world. The whole country has 
been taken possession of by military force. 
Why ? Because, and only because of its 
necessity. To preserve even the form of 
government, it was necessary that the whole 
force and energy of the nation should be 
employed against those who were arraying 
themselves against it. The whole nation, 
each man individually, and all collectively, 
constituted a physical power that might be 
used to preserve the nation against its ene- 
mies. The civil rights of the citizen became 
dead for the time being, if necessary to pre- 
serve the life of the nation. 

The counsel for the accused, in quoting 
my arguments respecting the jurisdiction 
of this Commission, evidently misconstrued 
my remarks as to each existing thing exer- 
cising its rights of self-defense according to 
the law of its organization. I am, for in- 
stance, organized and created as -a single, in- 
dividual thing, without weapons or means 
of defense, save my hands, and if my life 
were threatened by an antagonist, 1 must 
not, according to the theory of the gentle- 
man, take up a club or any weapon to de- 
fend that life, or call in the aid of my 
friend, but I must defend it according to 
the law of my organization, without any ex- 
trinsic aid. Is not the fallacy of the position 
apparent? Self-defense, self-preservation 
inevitably carries with it every means which 
that power can bring to assist in that self-de- 
fense and self-preservation. Just as defensive 
war may become offensive-defensive war. For 
the sake of saving yourself from invasion, 
you may invade the enemy, and yet it is but 
a defensive war. Each individual — every ex- 
isting unity or community — is endowed, by 
the very laws of its creation, with the power 
and the right to defend its own existence. 
That right is not lessened when individuals- 
join together and make communities. A 
man who has that right of self-protection 
does not, by joining himself to fifty or a hun- 
dred others, make his individual right less 
sacred; and when communities combine to 
form a government, the life of that govern- 
ment is at least as sacred as the life of an 
individual. In defending the life of the 
nation and its constitution, necessity be- 
comes the sole law. Whatever is necessary 
to be done, the Govei-nment is not only 
authorized, but is in duty bound to do. I 
accept it as a maxim that the only criterion 
for the exercise of martial law is its neces- 
sity. Whenever an officer, or the Chief 
Executive of this Government, acts with- 
out that necessity, he commits an act 
unauthorized; but so long as he keeps 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



69 



within that necessity, the law and the 
people — the givers of all power — will indorse 
him. 

It was not my intention to refer to the 
exigences that might necessitate martial law, 
or to the distinctions between martial law 
and military law — a distinction often disre- 
garded — but 1 beg to submit the following 
from the New American Cychjfedia which 
very clearly states the distinction: 

"'Martial law has often been confounded 
with military law, but the two are very dif- 
ferent. Military law, with us, consists of 
the'Eules and Articles of War,' and other 
statutory provisions for the government of 
military persons, to which may be added 
the unwritten or common law of the 'usage 
and custom of military service.' It exists 
equally in peace and in war, and is as fixed 
and definite in its provisions as the admi- 
ralty, ecclesiastical, or any other branch of 
law, and is equally, with them, a part of the 
general law of the land. But in the words 
of Chancellor Kent, ' martial law is quite a 
distinct thing.' It exists only in the time 
of war, and originates in military necessity. 
It derives no authority from the civil law, 
(using the term in its more general sense,) 
nor assistance from the civil tribunals, for 
it overrules, suspends, and replaces both. It 
is, from its very nature, an arbitrary power, 
and extends to all the inhabitants (whether 
civil or military) of the district where it is 
in force. It has been used in all countries, 
and by all governments, and it is as neces- 
sary to the sovereignity of a State as the 
power to declare and make war. The right 
to declare, apply and enforce martial law, is 
one of the sovereign powers, and resides in 
the governing authority of the State, and it 
depends on the Constitution of the State 
whether restrictions and rules are to be 
adopted for its application, or whether it is 
to be exercised according to the exigences 
which called it into existence. But even 
when left unrestricted by constitutional or 
statutory law, like the power of a civil court 
to jjunish contempts, it mu«t be exercised 
with due moderation and justice; and, as a 
permanent necessity alone can call it into 
existence, so must its exercise be limited to 
such times and places as this necessity may 
require ; and, moreover, it must be governed 
by the rules of general public law, as applied 
to a state of war. It, therefore, can not be 
despotically or arbitrarily exercised any 
more than any other belligerent right can 
be so exercised." (^Cushings Opinions of U. 
S. Attorney General, vol. 8, p. 365; Wolner's 
Jks Gaiiinm, sec. 865; Grotius De Jus Bel, B. 
lib. 3, cap. 8 ; KlvLer Dicit des Gens, sec. 255 ; 
O Briens American 3Iititary Law, p. 23; Hal 
leek's International Law and Laws of Tlar, p. 
303.) 

It is one of the concomitants of an army, 
as the counsel for the accused well remark- 
ed, that wherever that army goes, it carries 



with it martial law; and just to the extent 
that we here are under the rule of an army, 
just to that extent are we subject to the 
rules of martial law, vvithout any proclama- 
tion of the President on the subject. And 
furtlier, martial law, in my judgment, is not 
a tiling to be authorized by Congress. The 
decision of our ablest legal authorities may 
be shown to that efl:ect. It is an Executive 
power, only to be exercised under circum- 
stances of all-controlling necessity, by the 
Connnander-in-Chief, or the executive power 
of the Government. It is one of the preroga- 
tives of the Executive, and it can only be 
used by him and his subordinates — his lieu- 
tenants. 

If, for instance, the commanding officer 
of Kentucky, acting under the authority 
of the Chief Executive, the President, con- 
ceives there is a necessity for martial law 
to be declared in his district, he can de- 
clare it at his will ; but his superior will 
hold him responsible that he did not de- 
clare martial law till there was a necessity 
for it. So with General Hovey and his or- 
ders while commanding in this District. 

Martial law has, during the war, been de- 
clared by almost every commanding Gen- 
eral in the field ; and the power and the 
right to do so, have not, to my knowledge, 
ever been questioned in any department, 
and no prosecution has been known for the 
unlawful exercise of that power by any 
military commander. 

When General Hovey convened this Com- 
mission within the limits of his jurisdiction, 
and committed the case of Harrison H. 
Dodd, the accused, to this Commission, with 
orders to try it, he, by virtue of his mili- 
tary power, acting under the authority that 
was given to him by the Commander-in- 
Chief of the army, namely, the President 
of the United States, he suspended the 
civil law, and put in operation the military 
or martial law. The officers of this Com- 
mission could not, under the oath that they 
have taken, i-efuse to obey the orders of the 
officer placed over them. They could not 
stop and go back of that order, and refuse 
to hear and determine this case. 

Benet, who is our best authority upon mil- 
itary law, says, p. 13: "In the United 
States, martial law is a thing not mentioned 
by name, and scarcely as much as hinted 
at, in the Constitution and statutes. The 
former declares that ' the privilege of the 
writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspend- 
ed unless, when, in cases of rebellion or in- 
vasion, the public safety may require it.' " 

Upon that point much might be said, in 
connection with the condition of Indiana, 
as to whether the public safety did require 
the suspension of habeas corjms, and the 
declaration of martial law. I did not sup- 
pose there were two opinions on that ques- 
tion. 

BenSt continues: "The opinion is ex- 



70 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



pressed by the commentators on the Con- 
stitution, that the right to suspend the writ 
of habeas corpus, and also that of judging 
when the exigency has arisen, belong ex- 
clusively to Congress. But the rebellion or 
invasion may demand such suspension during 
a recess of the national legislature, and, by the 
laws of war, the executive has then the right 
to assume the power for the public safety. 
The relation between the proclamation of 
martial law and the suspension of the writ 
of habeas corpus, is extremely intimate; al- 
though it is but one of its consequences, and 
by no means the largest or gravest, since, 
according to every definition of martial law, 
it suspends, for the time being, all the laws of 
the land, and substitutes in their place no 
law ; that is, the mere will of the military 
commander." Here is another sentence in 
which much, very much, is included. I cite 
it, that it may be reflected upon : 

" It must be observed, however, that many of- 
feiises which in time of peace are civil offenses, 
become in time of war military offenses, and are 
to be tried by a military tribunal, even in places 
where civil tribunals exist." p. 10. 

I will only add a woi'd further in respect 
to the necessity that existed for martial 
law to step in at the time it did, here in the 
State of Indiana. It may be asked, did 
the necessity exist? The proof shows that 
there existed in this State an organization 
numbering from fifty to eighty thousand 
men, military in its character, and, about 
two-thirds armed, ready at any time to be 
called out to obey the orders of their su- 
periors, regardless of the law and authori- 
ties of the United States. That organiza- 
tion was armed and drilled with the avowed 
purpose of assisting the enemy as against 
the Government. This organization was 
ready at any moment to be called into the 
field, to release in our midst large numbers 
of rebel prisoners, feebly guarded. Did 
not such a state of things warrant the in- 
terference of the military power to stop this 
insurrection, and the possible bloodshed 
and anarchy that might have ensued here 
at our very door? 

I now pass for a moment to the fact of 
the absence of the prisoner. While I ad- 
mit that his absence should not prejudice 
him in the consideration of the proof, nor 
should it be taken, perhaps, as any confes- 
sion of guilt. When, however, the counsel 
attempt to argue on the force of the testi- 
mony that might have been introduced by 
the defense, they touch upon ground which 
they have no right to approach. This Com- 
mission does not know that any more proof 
could come before it. They must consider 
the evidence they have heard, and only 
that. The accused, by his absence, as I 
have before said, waves his right to any re- 
butting testimony, and says, in fact, " There 
is no further defense to be oft'ered in this 
case." If nothing is confessed against him, 



nothing certainly can be said for him by 
his act of escape. 

The counsel who last addressed the Com 
mission, contends that the organization 
known as the Order of American Knights, 
or the Order of the Sons of Liberty, is not 
a conspiracy. Then what is a conspiracy ? 
As defined by law writers, it is a combina- 
tion or agreement between two or more 
persons to do an illegal act, or to do a legal 
act in an illegal manner. If we take this 
association and try it by this rule, what do 
we find ? A body of men who were bound 
together by the most binding of oaths — the 
oath itself an unlawful thing, and the very 
organization of the society being unlawful 
in and of itself — recognizing military as 
well as civil officers unknown to, and in 
violation of, the Constitution and laws of 
the land. And for what purpose does the 
proof show this organization to have ex- 
isted? For the express purpose of defeat- 
ing and overthrowing the Government, 
while engaged in war against its enemies, 
for the purpose of aiding those enemies in 
their rebellion against the duly constituted 
authorities of the land. Other witnesses 
swear it was for the additional purpose of 
resisting the draft ; but every witness testi- 
fies directly to the fact, that the exj^ress pur- 
pose of the organization was to resist the Gov- 
ernment in its efibrts to suppress tlie exist- 
ing rebellion. Is this lawful, or unlawful ? 
Is this conspiracy, or is it not? It seems to 
me that one moment's consideration of the 
principles upon which this society was or- 
ganized, would determine the question be- 
yond dispute. It needs no argument. I 
refer the Commission to the proof 

The counsel saj'^ further that while this 
organization was vicious, it was not treason- 
able. Why, my God, what is treason ? 
What does a traitor do but try to destroy 
his Government ? Is it treason to organ- 
ize a society, the members of which take a 
solemn oath that when the enemies of their 
Government come over into their State, they 
will receive them as friends, shake hands 
with them, and, as opportunities oflFer, give 
them information from time to time of the 
movements of the Government forces ? Is 
it treason to assist in turning loose upon 
us the tigers that we have imprisoned here 
in our very midst, to arm those very men 
who are our avowed enemies, and the en- 
emies of our Government? Is it trea- 
son to endeavor to oi-ganize those rebel 
prisoners into a formidable military body 
to assist in the general rebellion against 
the Government? Is it treason to send 
messengers to the enemies of the Govern- 
ment, to tell them of the number of friends 
they have here in a loyal State, and assure 
them of sympathy and support? I can not 
conceive how a doubt for one moment can 
exist as to the treasonable nature of these 
designs. 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



71 



I wish to say one word with respect to the 
testimony of the witness Stidger. No mem- 
ber of this Commission, and I think I may say 
that no person sat in this hall, who did not 
believe that the witness testified to the 
truth. If he had not testified to the truth, 
he was a witness who could more easily have 
been convicted of falsehood than any one 
brought upon the stand. There was not a 
fact to which he testified, for which he did not 
give the place, date and person. When a wit- 
ness does that, every lawyer knows that you 
can trace up that man's history in his cross- 
-examination. If Captain Jones did not send 
him on a certain day to a certain person, to 
have a certain conversation, nothing would 
be easier than for Captain Jones to be called 
upon the stand to testify to the fact. If the 
witness Stidger had not met Bowles at the 
time and place he mentions, and have the 
conversation narrated, it would be easy to 
show that Bowles was elsewhere at the time. 
If he did not meet Dodd, and talk with him, 
at the time and place he says he did, how 
easily it could be refuted! When Stidger 
came upon the stand, he expected that he 
was to be met by every possible proof that 
could be brought against him. This witness 
testified that when he entered into this or- 
ganization, it was with the express intent and 
determination to develop its end and pur- 
poses. True, he was a Government detective; 
he states that he was so hired and employ- 
ed. As a rule, I have no kind of fellowship 
or sympathy with this class of men. But I 
believe that such a work could be engaged 
in and accomplished with a good intent and 
purpose. It is a species of strategy fully just- 
ified by the circumstances of the case, and 
is not unlike that to which our command- 
ing Generals in the field often resort in 
their efforts to deceive the enemy. They 
send false messages, write and forward 
false missives, on purpose to mislead them. 
They employ every means in their power to 
induce them to believe in and rely upon a 
certain state of things, the opposite of that 
which really exists. Stidger engaged in the 
work of revealing the designs of this treason- 
able organization, with the express purpose 
of giving information to the Government 
and saving bloodshed, and possibly National 



disaster. Such a man engaged in such a 
cause, and for such a purpose, can not be 
called an accomplice. Such a man can not 
be called a criminal, or a scoundrel. On the 
conti'ary, he perils his life to obtain facta 
which have proved of the greatest import- 
ance to the cause of justice, law and order. 
In such a cause, every man, loyal and true to 
his Government, will stand by him; and it 
ill becomes any man, especially in this State, 
to withhold that meed of praise which is his 
due for the services rendered to the Govern- 
ment. 

The case is now submitted to this Com- 
mission on the evidence before it; and I 
am content to leave it in your hands, after 
simply quoting the opening remarks of the 
counsel who last addressed you: "In ap- 
proaching the evidence in the case, we are 
almost subdued and awed into silence by 
considering the perilous precipice upon 
which society, especially in the South-west, 
so recently hung, if the testimony, in the 
plenitude of its details, or even in its gene- 
ral scope, is to be believed." Eespecting 
that testimony, this Commission is abund- 
antly able to judge. If this testimony is to be 
believed, this Government was on the brink 
of a precipice; and the evidence given upon 
this stand, under the solemnity of an oath, 
and with the eye of Almighty God resting 
on each witness, is of such a character that 
no argument of counsel, or finely drawn so- 
phistries, can change the perilous and trea- 
sonable nature of the circumstances testi- 
fied to. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
at 3 o'clock, P. M., to deliberate on the find- 
ing and sentence. 



Febbuaet 26, 1866. 

It is not thought advisable to longer de- 
lay the publication of these Treason trials, 
for the final action of the President in the 
matter. 

When the findings and sentences are ap- 
proved, they will be promulgated in General 
Orders, and will then be generally made 
known by means of the daily press. 



PROCEEDINGS 



MILITAKY COMMISSION, 

Which convened at Indianapolis, Indiana, by virtue of the following Special Orders, 

to wit : 



Headquarters District of Indiana, 1 
Indianapolis, September 17, 1864. j 

Special Orders No. 129. 

A Military Commission is constituted to 
meet at the United States Court Rooms in 
the city of Indianapolis, on the nineteenth 
(19th) day of September, 1864, at 10 o'clock, 
A. M., or as soon thereafter as practicable, 
for the trial of Harrison H. Dodd, and such 
other prisoners as may be brought before it 

DETAIL FOR THE COMMISSION. 

1. Brevet Brigadier General Silas Colgrove, 
United States Volunteers. 

2. Colonel William E. McLean, 43d In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

3. Colonel John T. Wilder, 17th Infantry, 
Indiana Volunteers. 

4. Colonel Thomas I. Lucas, 16th In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

5. Colonel Charles D. Murray, 89th In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

6. Colonel Benjamin Spooner, 83d In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

7. Colonel Richard P. DeHart, 128th In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

Major Henry L. Burnett, Judge Advocate 
Department of the Ohio and Northern De- 
partment, Judge Advocate. 

The Commission will sit without regard 
to hours. 

By order of Brevet Major General Alvin 
P. Hovey. AND C. KEMPER, 

Assistant Adjutant General. 

Also Special Orders appointing as mem- 
bers of the Commission : 

Colonel Ambrose A. Stevens, Veteran Re- 
serve Corps. 

Colonel Ansel D. Wass, 60th Infantry, 
Massachusetts Volunteers. 

Colonel Thomas W. Bennett, 69th In- 
fantry, Indiana Volunteers. 

Colonel Reuben Williams, 12th Infantry, 
Indiana Volunteers. 

Colonel Albert Heash, 100th Infantry, In- 
diana Volunteers. 



Also a Special Order, authorizing the 
Judge Advocate to employ an additional 
phonographic reporter. 



Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1 
October 21,* 1864, 11 o'clock, A. M. J" 

The Commission met in compliance with 
the foregoing Special Orders, and pursuant 
to adjournment. 

All the members present; f also the 
Judge Advocate. 

The Commission then proceeded to the 
trial of William A. Bowles, Andrew Hum- 
phreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milli- 
gan and Stephen Horsey, who were present 
before the Commission, and who, having 
heard read the orders appointing the Com- 
mission, were severally asked by the Judge 
Advocate if they had any objection to any 
member named in the orders, to which 
William A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heflner and Stephen Horsey sever- 
ally replied : " I have none." Lambdin P. 
Milligan replied, " I have no objection to 
any member but Colonel Wass." 

Colonel Wass having withdrawn from the 
court-room, the accused, Lambdin P. Milli- 
gan, stated his objection as follows: 

"I object to Colonel Wass, because he is 
from a locality where there are extreme 
prejudices against Western men, and he is 
likely to be influenced by those prejudices." 

The Court was then cleared for delibera- 
tion. J On being reopened, the Judge Advo- 



* An informal meeting was held on the 19th, pursuant 
to adjournment, but the case not being ready for trial, 
the Commission adjourned over to the '21st. 

f If a member of the Commission was absent from 
sickness, or other unavoidable cause, the case was pro- 
ceeded with only on the consent of the accused being 
given in open Court, and such member was only allowed 
to agaiu take his seat on the Commissi©!! with the con- 
sent of each and all the accused being given in opea 
Court, and after reading the tsstimony taken durin; tba 
absence of such member. 

I During the trial of these treason cases, the Commis- 
sion, iusiead of " clearing the Court," as is the custom ia 

73 



74 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



cate announced to tlie accused, Lambdin 
P. Milligan, that his objection was over- 
ruled. 

Colonel Ansel D. Wass then took his seat 
as a member of the Commission. 

The members of the Commission and the 
Judge Advocate were then duly sworn in the 
presence of the accused. 

Benn Pitman and W. S. Bush were duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, as recorders 
to the Commission, also in the presence of 
the accused. 

The accused, William A. Bowles, requested 
permission to introduce M. M. Ray and J. 
W. Gordon, Esqrs., as his counsel. 

The accused, Andrew Humphreys, re- 
quested permission to introduce M. M. Ray, 
E. A. Davis, Cyrus L. Dunham and J. W. 
Gordon, Esqrs., as his counsel. 

The accused, Horace Heflfren, requested 
permission to introduce Cyrus L. Dunham, 
E. A. Davis, M. M. Ray and J. W. Gordon, 
Esqrs., as his counsel. 

The accused, Lambdin P. Milligan, re- 
quested permission to introduce John R. 
Coftroth, Esq., as his counsel. 

The accused, Stephen Horsey, requested 
permission to introduce John Baker and C. 
L. Dunham. Esqrs., as his counsel. 

The requests of the accused were granted, 
and their counsel appeared in Court. 

The Judge Advocate stated that he had 
consented, by agreement with the counsel 
for the accused, that the question of the ju- 
risdiction of the Commission should be 
considered at the close of the case, with its 
full force and effect upon the Commission, 
as though it were taken up and considered 
now. It was also agreed between the Judge 
Advocate and the counsel for the accused, 
that any substantial objection to the charges 
and specifications, as now jDresented, should 
be considered at the final summing up of 
the case. 

The accused, William A. Bowles, Andrew 
Humphreys, Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. 
Milligan and Stephen Horsey were then ar- 
raigned on the following charges and speci- 
fications: 

CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS 

PREFERRED AGAINST 

WILLIAM A. BOWLES, ANDREW 
HUMPHREYS, HORACE HEF- 
FREN, LAMBDIN P. MIL- 
LIGAN, AND STEPHEN 
HORSEY, 

CUieent of the S(ate of Indiana, United Stntea of America. 

CHARGE FIRST.— Conspiracy against the 
Government of the United States. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
Baid Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 



military courts, retired to an adjoining room for delibe- 
ration, \t> aviiid the incouveiiitnce of diBmissiug the audi- 
ence assembled to listen to the proceedings. 



Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milh'gan, and 
Stephen Horsey, did, among themselves, 
and with Harrison H. Dodd, of Indiana, 
Joshua F. Bullitt, of Kentucky, J. A Bar- 
rett, of Missouri, and others, conspire 
against the Government and duly consti- 
tuted authorities of the United States, and 
did join themselves to, and secretly organize 
and disseminate, a secret, unlawful society 
or order, known as the Order of American 
Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, 
having both a civil and military organiza- 
tion and jurisdiction, for the purpose of 
overthrowing the Government and duly 
constituted authorities of the United States. 
This, at a period of war and armed rebel- 
lion against the authority of the United 
States, at or near Indianapolis, Indiana, a 
State within the military lines of the Army 
of the United States, and the theater of 
military operations, and which had been, 
and was constantly threatened to be, in- 
vaded by the enemy. This, on or about the 
I6th day of May, 1864. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, during an existing rebel- 
lion against the Government and authori- 
ties of the United States — said rebellion 
claiming to be in the name of, and on be- 
half of certain States, being a part of and 
owing allegiance to the United States — did 
combine and agree with one Harrison H. 
Dodd, of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, of Ken- 
tucky, J. A. Barrett, of Missouri, and 
others, to adopt and impart to otliers the 
creed or ritual of a secret, unlawful society 
or order, known as the Order of American 
Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, 
denying the authority of the United States 
to coerce to submission certain rebellious 
citizens of said United States, designing 
thereby to lessen the power and prevent the 
increase of the armies of the United States, 
and thereby did recognize and sustain the 
right of the citizens and States, then in re- 
bellion, to disregard and resist the authority 
of the United States. This, at a period 
of war and armed rebellion against the* 
authority of the United States, at or 
near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, a 
State within the military lines of the Army 
of the United States, and the theater of 
military operations, which had been, and 
was threatened to be, invaded by the en- 
emy. This, on or about the 22d day of Feb- 
ruary, 1864. 

Specification Third. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, citizens of the State of 
Indiana, owing true faith and allegiance to 
the Government of the United States, and 
while pretending to be peaceable, loyal citi- 
zens of the Government, did secretly and 
covertly combine, agree, and conspire, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



7S 



among themselves, and with one Harrison 
H. Dodd, of Indiana, Joshua F. Bullitt, of 
Kentucky, J. A. Barrett, of Missouri, and 
others, to overthrow and render powerless 
the Government of the United States, and 
did, in pursuance of said combination, 
agreement and conspiracy, form and organ- 
ize a certain unlawful, secret society or 
order, and did extend, and assist in extend- 
ing, said unlawful secret society or order, 
known as the Order of American Knights, 
or Order of Sons of Liberty, whose intent 
and purpose was to cripple and render 
powerless the efforts of the Government of 
the United States, in suppressing a then 
existing formidable rebellion against said 
Government. This, on or about the 1st day 
of October, 1863, at a period of war and 
armed rebellion, at or near the city of In- 
dianapolis, Indiana, a State within the mili- 
tary lines of the Army of the United 
States, and the theater of military op- 
erations, which had been, and was con- 
stantly threatened to be, invaded by the 
enemy. 

Specification Fourth. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heftren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, did conspire and agree 
with Harrison H. Dodd, David T. Yeagle, 
John C. Walker, and Joshua F. Bullitt, 
and others, these men at that time holding 
military positions and rank in a certain 
secret, unlawful society or organization, 
known as the Order of American Knights, 
or Order of the Sons of Liberty, to seize by 
force the United States and State Arsenals 
at Indianapolis, Indiana, Columbus, Ohio, 
and Springtield, Illinois, to release by force 
the rebel prisoners held by the authorities 
of the United States, at Camp Douglas, Illi- 
nois, Camp Morton, Indiana, and Cam^D Chase, 
Ohio, and the Depot of Prisoners of War on 
Johnson's Islajid ; and arm those prisoners 
with the arms thus seized, and that then 
said conspirators, with all the forces they 
were able to raise in the secret order 
above-named, were, in conjunction with the 
rebel prisoners thus released and armed, to 
march into Kentucky and Missouri, and 
co-operate with the rebel forces to be sent 
to those States by the rebel authorities, 
against the Government and authorities of 
the United States. This, on or about the 
'20th day of July, 1864, at a period of war 
and rebellion against the authority of the 
United States, at or near the city of Chi- 
cago, Illinois, a State within the lines of the 
Army of the United States, and the theater 
of military operations, and threatened by 
invasion of the enemy. 

Charge Second. — Affording aid and comfort to 
Rebels agahist the authority erf the United 
States. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
Baid Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 



Horace Heflren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and, 
Stephen Horsey, being then members of a 
certain secret, unlawful society, or order, 
known as the Order of American Knights,, 
or Order of the Sons of Liberty — the United 
States being then in arms to suppress a 
rebellion in certain States against the au- 
thority of the United States — said Wm. A. 
Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, Horace Hef- 
fren, Lambdin P. Milligan, Stephen Horsey, 
and others, then and there acting as mem- 
bers and officers of said secret, unlawful 
society or order, did design and plot to. 
communicate with the enemies of the 
United States, and did communicate with 
the enemies of the United States, with the 
intent that they should, in large force, in- 
vade the territory of the United States, 
to-wit: the States of Kentucky, Indiana, and 
Illinois ; with the further intent, that the- 
so-called secret, unlawful society, or order,, 
aforesaid, should then and there co-operate 
with the said armed forces of the said re- 
bellion against the authority of the United 
States, and did communicate to said armed 
forces the intent and j^jurposes of said 
secret, unlawful society or order. This, at 
a period of war and armed rebellion against 
the authority of .the United States, at or 
near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, a 
State within the military lines of the Army 
of the United States, and the theater of 
military operations, which had been, and 
was constantly threatened to be, invaded 
by the enemies of the L^nited States. This^ 
on or about the 16th day of May, 1864. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys,. 
Horace Heftren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, while the Government 
was attemj^ting by force of arms to suppress- 
an existing rebellion, while guerrillas, and 
other armed supporters of the rebellion, 
were in the State of Kentucky, did send 
a messenger, and brother member with 
them of a secret, unlawful society or order, 
known as the Order of American Knights, 
or Order of the Sons of Liberty, into said 
State of Kentucky, with instructions for 
Joshua F. Bullitt, Grand Commander of said 
secret, unlawful society or order, in said 
State, and other members of said secret 
society or order in said State, to select good 
couriers or runners, to go upon short no- 
tice, and for the purpose of assisting those 
in rebellion against the United States, to 
call to arms the members of said secret so- 
ciety or order, and other sympathizers with 
the existing rebellion, whenever a signal 
should be given by the authorities of said 
secret society or order. This, on or about 
the 20th day of July, 1864, at a period of 
war and armed rebellion against the author- 
ity of the United States, at or near Indian- 
apolis, Indiana, a State within the military 
lines of the Army of the United States, 
and the theater of military operations, and 



76 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



which had been, and was constantly threat- 
ened to be, invaded by the enemy. 

Specification Third. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heftren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, being citizens of the State 
of Indiana, United States of America, and 
owing true allegiance to the said United 
States, did join themselves to a certain un- 
lawful, secret society or order, known as the 
Order of American Knights, or Order of 
Sons of Liberty, designed for the overthrow 
of the Government of tlie United States. 
and to compel terms with the citizens or 
authorities of the so-called Confederate 
States, the same being portions of the United 
States, and in rebellion against the author- 
ity of the United States, and did communi- 
cate the designs and intent of said order to 
those in rebellion against the Government 
of the United States. This, on or about 
the 20th day of July, 1864, at a period of 
war and armed rebellion against the au- 
thority of the United States, at or near In- 
dianapolis, Indiana, a State within the mil- 
itary lines of the Army of the United States, 
and the theater of military operations, and 
which had been, and was constantly threat- 
ened to be, invaded by the enemy. 

CHARGE THIRD.— Inciting Insurrection. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, did, during a time of war be- 
tween the United States and armed enemies 
of the United States, and of rebellion against 
its Government, organize and attempt to 
arm, and did arm, a portion of the citizens of 
the United States through an unlawful, se- 
cret society or order, known as the Order 
of American Knights, or Order of the Sons 
of Liberty, with the intent to induce them, 
with themselves, to throw oflF the authority 
of the L^nited States, and co-operate with 
said armed enemies of the United States, 
against the legally constituted authorities 
of the United States. This, on or about 
the 20th day of July, 1864, at or near Indi- 
anapolis, Indiana, a State within tl>e mili- 
tary lines of the army of the United States, 
and the theater of military operations, and 
which had been, and was constantly tlireat- 
ened to be, invaded by tlie enemy. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said William A. Bowles, Andrew Hum- 
phreys, Horace Hoffren, Lambdin P. Milli- 
gan, and Stephen Horsey, did, by public 
addresses, by secret circulars and commu- 
nications, and by other means, endeavor 
to, and did arouse sentiments of hostility 
to the Government of the United States, 
and did attempt to induce the people to re- 
volt again.st said Government, and secretly 
organize and arm tliemselves for the pur- 
pose of resisting the laws of the United 
States, and the orders of the duly elected 



President thereof This, on or about the 
16th day of February, 1864, at a period of 
war and armed rebellion against the au 
thority of the LTnited States, at or near In- 
dianapolis, Indiana, a State within the 
military lines of the army of the United 
States, and the theater of military opera- 
tions, and which had been, and was con- 
stantly threatened to be, invaded by the 
enemy. 

CHARGE FOURTH— Disloyal Practices. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Hetfren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, at a time of war, and dur- 
ing an armed rebellion against the legally 
constituted authorities and Government of 
the United States, did counsel and advise 
citizens of, and owing allegiance and mili- 
tary service to the LTnited States, to dis- 
regard the authority of the LTnited States, 
and to resist a call or draft, designed to in- 
crease the army of the United States, and 
did make preparation, and attempt to arm, 
and did arm, certain citizens of the LTnited 
States, belonging to a certain unlawful, se- 
cret society or order, known as the Order 
of American Knights, or Order of the Sons 
of Liberty, for the purjiose and with the 
intent of resisting said call or draft. This, 
on or about the 1st day of July, 1864, at or 
near Shoal's Station, Martin county, Indi- 
ana, a State within the military lines of the 
army of the United States, and the theater 
of militai'y operations, and which had been, 
and was constantly threatened to be, in- 
vaded by the enemy. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Hetfren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, at a time of war, and dur- 
ing an armed rebellion against the legally 
constituted authorities and Government of 
the United States, d^id counsel and advise 
citizens of, and owing allegiance and mili- 
tary service to the United States, to disre- 
gard the authority of the LTnited States, 
and to resist a call or draft, designed to in- 
crease the army of the United States, and 
did make preparation, and attempt to arm, 
and did arm, certain citizens of the United 
States, belonging to a certain unlawful, se- 
cret society or order, known as the Order 
of American Knights, or Order of the Sons 
of Liberty, for the purpose and with the 
intent of resisting said call or draft. This, 
on or about the 1st day of November, 18f)3, 
at or near Green Fork township, Randolph 
county, Indiana, a State within the mili- 
tary lines of the army of the United States, 
and the theater of military operations, and 
which had been, and was constantly threat- 
ened to be, invaded by the enemy. 

Specification Third. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humi)hreys, 
Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan and 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



77 



Stephen Horsey, at a time of war, and dur- 
ing an armed rebellion against the legally 
constituted authorities and Government of 
the United States, did -counsel and advise 
citizens of, ai?':' or,'in^ al.^giance and mili- 
tary service to. the united States, to dis- 
regard the authority of the United States, 
and to resist a call or draft, designed to in- 
crease the army of the United States, and 
did make preparation, and did attempt to 
arm, and did arm, certain citizens of the 
united States, belonging to a certain un- 
lawful secret society or order, known as the 
Order of American Knights, or Order of 
Sons of Liberty, for the purpose and with 
the intent of resisting said call or draft. 
This, on or about the 16th day of May, 1864, 
at or near Indianapolis, Indiana, a State 
within the military lines of the army of 
the United States, and the theater of mili- 
tary operations, and which had been, and 
was constantly threatened to be, invaded 
by the enemy. 

Specification Fourth. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, at a time of war, and dur- 
ing an armed rebellion against the legally 
constituted authorities and Government of 
the United States, did counsel and advise 
citizens of, and owing allegiance and mili- 
tary service to, the United States, to dis- 
regard the authority of the United States, 
and to resist a call or draft, designed to in- 
crease the armj' of the United States, and 
did make preparation and attempt to arm, 
and did arm, certain citizens of the United 
States, belonging to a certain unlawful se- 
cret society or order, known as the Order 
of American Knights, or Order of the Sons 
of Liberty, for the purpose and with the 
intent of resisting said call or draft. This, 
on or about the first day of August, 1864, 
at or near Salem, Washington county, In- 
diana, a State within the military lines of the 
army of the United States, and the theater 
of military operations, and which had been, 
and was constantly threatened to be, in- 
vaded by the enemy. 

Specification Fifth. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, did accept and hold offices 
of the military forces for the State of Indi- 
ana, in a certain unlawful secret society, 
or order, known as the Order of American 
Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, 
which said offices and military forces were 
unknown to the Constitution and laws of 
the LTnited States, or of the State of In- 
diana, and were not in aid of, but opposed 
to, the legally constituted authorities there- 
of. This, on or about the 16th day of Feb- 
ruary, 1864, at a time of war and armed re- 
bellion against the authority of the L'^ni- 
ted States, at or near Indianapolis, Indiana, 
a State within the military lines of the 



army of the LTnited States, and the theater 
of military operations, and which had been, 
and was constantly threatened to be, in- 
vaded by the enemy. 

CHARGE FIFTH.— Violation of the Laws 
of War. 

Specification First. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowles, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Hefi'ren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, did, while the Govern- 
ment of the United States was carrying on 
war with the enemies of the United States, 
engaged in rebellion against their author- 
ity, while pretending to be peaceable, loyal 
citizens of the United States, violate their 
allegiance, and did, as citizens of said Gov- 
ernment, attempt to introduce said ene- 
mies of the United States into the loyal 
States of said United States, thereby to 
overthrow and destroy the authority of the 
United States. This, on or about the 16th 
day of May, 1864, at or near the city of 
Indianapolis, Indiana, a State within the 
military lines of the army of the United 
States, and the theater of military opera- 
tions, which had been, and was constantly 
threatened to be, invaded by the enemy. 

Specification Second. — In this, that the 
said Wm. A. Bowdes, Andrew Humphreys, 
Horace Heffren, Lambdin P. Milligan, and 
Stephen Horsey, did, during a war between 
the United States and the said enemies of 
the United States, engaged in rebellion 
against their authority, and while pretend- 
ing to be peaceable, loyal citizens of the 
United States, organize and extend a cer- 
tain unlawful, secret society or order, 
known as the Order of American Knights, 
or Order of the Sons of Liberty, having for 
its purpose the same general object and 
design as the said enemies of the United 
States, and with the intent to aid and in- 
sure the success of said enemies in their 
resistance to the legally constituted au- 
thorities of the United States. This, at or 
near the city of Indianapolis, Indiana, on 
or about the 16th day of May, 1864. 

HENRY L. BURNETT, 
Judge Advocate Department of the Ohio and 

Northern Department. 

To which charges and specifications the 
accused, all and severallj', to each and all 
the chai'ges and specifications, pleade«l not 

GUILTY. 

The Judge Advocate then asked the ac- 
cused if they were ready for trial. 

J. W. Gordon, counsel for the accused, 
William A. Bowles, Horace Heffren, and 
Andrew Humphreys, moved for a separate 
trial in their behalf, and submitted the fols 
lowing reasons : 
Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission: 

Recognizing the law which governs this 
Commission — as the common law, the old 
English common law, which has been adopt- 



78 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



ed by every State in the Union — as the law 
■which shall influence this Commission in 
determining how these defendants shall be 
tried, I ask you to favor them each with a sep- 
arate trial. All the States, I believe, have 
enacted statntes on this subject. Our own 
State has enacted a statute providing for 
separate trials of defendants jointly charged 
with criminal ofienses. The civil courts of 
the United States generally accord to the 
defendant, or person charged with an 
offense, the same rule of practice which 
they enjoy as a right in their State courts. 
But we do not ask a separate trial on that 
ground. We put the plea on the discre- 
tion of this Court, as governed by the com- 
mon law, believing that these defendants 
have interests that can not be subserved 
by trying them together, and as a matter 
of justice I ask the Court for their sever- 
ance on trial. In behalf of Horace Hef- 
fren, Andrew Humphreys and William A. 
Bowles, for whom I appear, I move the 
Court for a separate trial for them. 

I may also state to the Court a fact which 
will be apparent on the trial of these 
causes. Each will have separate witnesses, 
and will pursue a different line of defense. 
Each has his own character to defend. The 
trial going on as one trial during the prose- 
cution, will assume in the defense tlie at- 
titude of separate trials, and the defendants 
and their counsel will labor under great in- 
conveniences and difficulties in their behalf 

Another point I make is, that as these 
men are all charged as citizens of Indiana, 
they are entitled as such to separate trials, 
as there are no rules laid down for the reg- 
ulation of these trials, and one might put in 
a plea on that ground. We trust the motion 
for a separate trial for the defendants to 
the discretion of the Commission, as a 
matter of justice to the accused. 

Cyrus L. Dunham, counsel for Stephen 
Horsey, one of the accused, moved for a 
separate trial for the accused, for the follow- 
ing reasons : 

It is, in my opinion, entirely without pre- 
cedent in Military Courts, to put two pris- 
oners on trial at the same time. Defend- 
ants, jointly charged, are entitled to all the 
benefits they can derive from separate trials. 
In a joint trial, the evidence introduced 
against one defendant might militate 
against another, and bear more strongly 
against him than if he was tried separately. 
Tlie prosecution, he presumed, would, in its 
evidence, follow the line pursued in the 
Dodd trial, proving one act of one party 
by one witness, and separate acts of other 
parties by other witnesses. The defense 
would branch out into separate lines, ac- 
cording to the side issues presented. The 
evidence might not bear as strongly against 
one defendant as against the other, and 
this might confuse the Commission when it 
comes to a final decision. 



Lambdin P. Milligan, one of the accused, 
moved in his own behalf, for a separate trial, 
for the following reasons : 

"It is exceedingly inconvenient for me to 
be present at the trial, on account of sick- 
ness. I wish as short a trial as possible, 
and the evidence introduced against others 
may protract the trial to great length. It 
is impossible, I am advised by my physi- 
cians, to be in any position but a recumbent 
one, without permanent injury to my limb. 
If granted a separate trial, I will waive all 
technical objections in the progress of the 
case. For these reasons, I ask the Commis- 
sion to grant me a separate trial" 

The Judge Advocate replied : 

Gentlemen of the Commission: 

An application has been presented to the 
Commission, from each of the accused, for 
a separate trial. I do not propose person- 
ally to object to those applications. I only 
desire to put before the minds of the Court 
the reasons and facts that present them- 
selves to my mind against the grant of the 
application. 

The offenses charged against these de- 
fendants are joint. They are in the nature 
of a conspiracy. Conspiracy is the gist of 
the charges, and the other offenses charged 
grew out of this. Once having established 
the conspiracj', the acts of any one of the 
conspirators are liable to be brought in 
proof as evidence against any other mem- 
ber of the conspiracy. About that princi 
pie of law there can be no question. Not 
only ca"n the acts of any member of a com- 
mon conspiracy be brought as proof againsi 
other co-conspii'ators, but also their admis- 
sions, their letters, their writings, and the 
records they leave behind them. In that 
case, the proof on the part of the Govern- 
ment will be no more comj^licated in the 
matter of proof against the accused in a joint 
trial than if separate ti'ials were granted. 
The proof against one is proof against all 
the accused. That being the case, we may 
prove against Milligan the acts of Dodd, 
and the testimony introduced by Milligan 
that he did not do these acts himself, con- 
stitutes no defense for him. When he 
takes upon himself the responsibility of 
joining an unlawful body, he takes upon 
himself the responsibility for every unlaw- 
ful act of that body. The law also holds 
that when men combine together for such . 
purposes, having greater power for evil 
through such an organization, they shall 
be held to a greater accountability. There 
is also a greater latitude given in proof 
against conspirators than against any other 
class of criminals known to the law. That 
being the case, the argument for a separate 
defense has but little weight. Even if it 
is important that each man should put his 
character in issue and prove his good char- 
acter, he can do that as well when on trial 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



79 



jointly as singly. You, gentlemen of the 
Commission, make up your verdict against 
each one of these defendants separately. 
If you find that any one of these men has 
been misled, you may take into considera- 
tion the absence of evil intent in joining 
this organization, as well in a joint trial as 
in separate trials. There is no argument 
the accused can advance against joint trials 
which will show that they are deprived of 
any rights and privileges which would ac- 
crue from separate trials. They can not, 
and do not claim that under the common 
law they may sever these prisoners and in- 
troduce them as witnesses, one in favor of 
the other. They know that they can not 
do that. No benefit in that respect would 
accrue to thera from a separate trial. 

The question submitted to the Court is a 
matter of policy simply, and in respect to 
that, there are two important considera- 
tions. There are the rights and privileges 
of the accused to be considered, and also 
the rights and privileges of the Govern- 
ment. One should be weighed and bal- 
anced against the othei'. I would say to 
the Commission, give to the defendants 
the greatest possible latitude consistent 
with the interests of the Government, 
where no rights will be waived. I will 
grant them every thing that involves mere 
form and courtesy. 1 will go further to 
issue processes to bring in witnesses for 
the accused than I would for the Govern- 
ment. But while granting all possible lati- 
tude to the accused, I can not forget that 
there comes up a strong plea from unnum- 
bered thousands who have an interest in 
the results of this Commission. 

There are sitting around me officers, 
none under the rank of Colonel ; one who 
presides over the Commission, with the 
rank of Brevet Brigadier General. Each 
of you is entitled to command a regiment 
of one thousand men ; and some, if not all of 
you, were in command of brigades in the 
field, numbering from one to three thou- 
sand men. You are the representatives 
of fifteen thousand men at least, who, un- 
der your leadership, would do gallant ser- 
vice for your country. You, gentlemen of 
the Commission, are needed in the field, 
and whether you shall consume unneces- 
sary time by protracting these trials, is a 
matter of importance to the Government, 
and to the untold millions who look forward 
with interest and hope to the future for the 
success of its armies. 

There is also another consideration of 
some importance to the Government. You 
git on this Commission at a great cost to 
the Government, for the pay of members, 
of witnesses, and other expenses. That is 
a point to be considered in determining the 
motion for separate trials. If no rights of 
the accused are to be prejudiced by a joint 
trial, the question in economy becomes an 



important argument in favor of proceeding 
with the trial of the prisoners as arraigned. 

I would also add, that if any single right 
of any one of the accused would be preju- 
diced by a joint trial, I would not urge it. 
I have looked at this matter in all its lights, 
and can not see that, individually, they will 
be prejudicial in a single right which they 
would have if separate trials were accorded 
them. 

As Judge Advocate of this Department, I 
have vast rights, duties and responsibilfties. 
My detention here will result in holding 
hundreds of persons now in prison, charged 
with military oflfenses, who are waiting their 
trials. I have to organize Courts for their 
trials, to prefer the charges against them, and 
exercise a general supervision over the pro- 
ceedings of these courts. There are other 
men besides the prisoners now in Court, 
who are asking of the Government a speedy 
hearing. They have rights at stake as well 
as the accused here. While, therefore, I ask 
of you no one thing which can do the accused 
any wrong, or which will limit them in 
bringing every fact, which will accrue to their 
benefit, before this Commission, while I 
would grant them every possible courtesy, 
I must ask the Commission to use its discre- 
tion so wisely, that it shall not wrong others, 
or the Government. 

One of the counsel for the accused states 
that he has examined military books, and 
has not found a single case where prisoners 
have been jointly arraigned before a military 
court. I will state that in my military ex- 
perience, and as Judge Advocate, I have not 
seen a single case that did not make pre- 
cedents. This war has been constantly ma- 
king precedents. The army of the United 
States has exceeded in magnitude, during 
this war, any thing conceived by the found- 
ers of this Government. The army has pro- 
gressed in all respects further in two years 
than it would have done in two centuries at 
its former rate of existence. This fact has 
given rise to new conditions. We do not 
act entirely in accordance with the common 
law, as recognized two centuries ago, but 
settle its principles, as applied to military 
oflfenses, and make precedents, in every case 
which we try in military courts. We make 
precedents in the government of the army, 
and in the military courts. All that the 
accused have a right to ask here is, that this 
Commission violate no law, and do them 
exact justice. I, therefore, submit to you 
for decision the application for a severance 
of the defendants. 

The court-room was then cleared for the 
purpose of deliberation on the application 
of the accused. 

On the re-opening of the court-room, the 
Judge Advocate announced that the. Com- 
mission proposed to hold the application of 
the accused under advisement until 2J 
o'clock, P. M. 



80 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
6t half past 2 o'clock P. M. 

AFTERNOON SESSION. 

Court Boom, IsDtAX'APOLis, Indiana, \ 
October 21, 1864., 2>^ o'clock, P. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused and their 
counsel. 

The court-room was then cleared for de- 
liberation on the question of granting the 
accused a separate trial. 

On the re-opening of the Court, the Judge 
Advocate announced to the accused that 
the Commission, after a full and careful de- 
liberation of the question, had concluded 
that in view of the fact, that no right or 
rights of any of the accused, inany particular, 
would be prejudiced by a joint trial, it was 
their duty to proceed with the trial of the 
prisoners as they were arraigned. 

William M. Harrison, a witness for the 
Government, was then introduced, and 
being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, 
testified as follows: 

Question by the Judge Advocate : Please 
give to the Court your name and residence? 

Answer. William M. Harrison; I reside 
in this city. 

Q. State your business for the last year 
or two? 

A. I have been in no particular business 
for the last year. I was traveling and col- 
lecting for George W. Howes a portion of the 
time during last year. 

Q. Have you had any other employ for 
which you received pay and compensation? 

A. I was employed as Grand Secretary of 
the Grand Council of the Sons of Liberty in 
the State of Indiana, at a salary of $800 per 
annum. I became a member of the Grand 
Council, on or about the 27th of August, 
1863, and became Grand Secretary of the 
Grand Council on or about the 10th of Sep- 
tember, 1863. 

Q. When and where did you first have 
any knowledge of the Order of American 
Knights, or Order of the Sons of Liberty, 
or Knights of the Golden Circle? 

A. The first knowledge I ever had of the 
<;)i'der of American Knights was at Terre 
Haute, on or about the 27th of August, 
1863. I received a letter from H. H. Dodd 
at Terre Haute, requesting me to go there; 
when there I was invited to attend a meet- 
ing that night. I did so; there were but 
twelve or fifteen present. 

Q. Whom did you meet there? 

A. Among those I recollect were P. C. 
Wright, and a person by the name of D. R 
Eckles, John K Risley, Galium Bayley and 
John G. Davis. Most of them were strang- 
ers to me. 

Q. What was done at that meeting? 

A, Mr. Wright appeared to have charge 



of the meeting. He stated that it was 
called for the purpose of organizing a secret 
society. He proceeded to initiate members, 
and, after that, to organize the Grand Coun- 
cil of the State of Indiana. Those who were 
initiated, were initiated in the three degrees 
at the same time. 

Q. Were you initiated in the three de- 
gi-ees at that time? 

A. I was. 

Q. Who were elected oflBcers? 

A. D. R. Eckles was elected Temporary 
Grand Commander; H. H. Dodd, Temporary 
Deputy Grand Commander ; John E. Risley, 
Temporary Grand Secretary, and I was 
elected Temporary Assistant Secretary. 

Q. Where was the next meeting held? 

A. In this city, about the 10th of Septem- 
ber following, at the Military Hall, over 
Talbot & Co.'s jewelry store. It was an 
adjourned meeting of the Grand Council 
that had met at Terre Haute. It convened 
about 9 or 10 in the morning of, I think, 
the 10th of September. They adjourned 
at noon, and met again at 2 o'clock. 

Q. What business did they transact? 

A. In the morning, those persons who 
were delegates from various counties, who 
had not been initiated into the Order, were 
initiated by Mr. Wright. 

Q. Who was President? 

A. Mr. Dodd, both in the forenoon and 
afternoon. Mr. Wright initiated members 
present who had never received degrees ; 
after he got through initiating those, he ini- 
tiated the members present in the Grand 
Council Degree, and declared the Council 
open for business. I was initiated in that 
degree. 

Q. In what did it differ from others? 

A. Simply in the sign of recognition and 
colloquy. 

Q. Who were initiated that day ? 

A. David T. Yeakle and Dr. Bowles. The 
great majority of the memberswere initiated 
on that day. 

Q. Were any other citizens, now present 
in this court room, initiated that day, that 
you remember ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was any other business done besides 
the initiation of members ? 

A. After the members had been initiated 
in the Grand Council Degree, Mr. Wright 
declared the Council ready for business, and 
proceeded to the election of officers, which 
resulted in the election of H. H. Dodd as 
Grand Commander, and David T. Yeakle, 
Deputy Grand Commander. I was elected 
Grand Secretary. We immediately pro- 
ceeded to other business. A committee, 
under the name of a military committee, 
was appointed to draft a military bill. Mr. 
Dodd was a member, and Yeakle and 
Bowles. I think there were one or two 
others, but I do not remember their names. 

Q. Was any military bill drafted by them? 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



81 



A- It was the subject of discussion in the 
afternoon. 

Q. What became of it ? 

A. It was in my possession, and I des- 
troyed it. 

Q. When? 

A. I destroyed all the papers belonging 
to the organization after the exposition in 
the Indianapolis Journal. 

Q. Give the Court the features of that 
bill, as near as you can recollect. 

A. It provided for the division of the 
State into four districts; the National Road 
divided the north and south parts of the 
State. The names of the districts were the 
North-eastern, North-western, South-eastern 
and South-western. The counties in these 
districts were divided as nearly equal as 
could be. It also went into detail to pro- 
vide for the organization of the whole mili- 
tary force, the number and size of the regi- 
ments to be raised, duties of officers, etc. 

Q. What was to be the size of the regi- 
ments ? 

A. They were to consist of nine compa- 
nies of infantry, one company of rifles, and 
one section of artillery. The bill provided 
for the election of major generals; and 
they spoke of providing that major gener- 
als should appoint brigadiers, the brigadiers 
appoint colonels, colonels appoint the cap- 
tains, and captains the subordinate offi- 
cers. 

Q. Were any major generals appointed ? 

A. Yes, sir; David T. Yeakle and Andrew 
Humphi-eys were appointed under that bill; 
Mr. Milligan, and Mr. Conklin, living of this 
city. These four were all. 

Q. Was Milligan appointed one of the 
major generals? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know him ? 

A. I see him there. 

The witness here pointed to the accused, 
Lambdin P. Milligan. 

Q. Is that the Milligan you have refer- 
ence to? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you see any others present in the 
court room who were appointed major gen- 
erals ? 

A. Dr. Bowles I see present, and Mr. 
Humphreys. 

The witness here pointed to the accused, 
Wm. A. Bowles and Andrew Humphreys. 

Q. Is that the Dr. Bowles who was pres- 
ent at that meeting? 

A. It is. 

Q. Is that the Andrew Humphreys who 
was appointed major general ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were any other appointments made 
then? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Were any of those appointments made 
outside of the membership of the order ? 

A. Mv understanding of the matter was, 
6 



that appointments were made among mem- 
bers of the order only. 

Q. Were any speeches made at that 
meeting? 

A. Dr. Bowles spoke at considerable 
length, but I do not remember the matter 
of his remarks, except that they were on 
the features of the military bill. Dr. Year 
kle spoke on the same subject. 

Q. State whether or not, at that meeting, 
he urged the arming of the members of the 
order. 

A. As far as I recollect, I can not say. 

Q. To what time did it adjourn ? 

A. To meet during the month of Novem- 
ber following. 

Q. State if it met, and if so, who pre- 
sided. 

A. It did, at the former place of meeting. 
Harrison H. Dodd presided, and I acted as 
secretary. 

Q. Who were present ? 

A. Mr. Milligan and J. J. Bingham, and 
delegates were present from some thirty 
counties. 

Q. Were any others present at that meet- 
ing that you now see in this court room ? 

A. I do not think there were. Neither 
Stephen Horsey, Andrew Humphreys, nor 
Horace Hefiren was present. Dr. Bowles 
was present. 

Q. Was L. P. Milligan present? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State what was done at that meeting. 

A. There was not much business trans- 
acted. A committee was appointed to get 
up a prospectus of a newspaper, to advocate 
the distinctive principle of the order. That 
was discussed at considerable length. There 
was some discussion in regard to the exten- 
sion of the Democratic party. The exten- 
sion of the order in the various counties 
was particulai'ly talked of Discussion on ed- 
ucation also took place at that meeting. 
No speeches were made at that meeting, as 
far as I can recollect ; they did not go be- 
yond an organization for political purposes. 

Q. What was said at that meeting about 
the object of the military organization? 

A. Nothing was said about it, except that 
it was necessary to organize in a military 
capacity, to protect the rights of the mem- 
bers against the encroachments of the Ad- 
ministration. 

Q. Where was the next meeting ? 

A. It was held in this city, on the 16th or 
17th of February, 1864. 

Q. Were there present any of the per- 
sons now in the court room, as far as you 
remember ? 

K Mr. HeflEren, Mr. Milligan and Mr. 
Bowles were present. Mr. Humphreys and 
Mr. Horsey were not present. I can not 
say positively whether Mr. Milligan was 
present or not; he was absent from one 
meeting, and I think it was that one. Heff- 
ren and Bowles made speeches. 



82 



TREASO!» TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Q. "What was the general object of this 
meeting of the 16th or 17th ? 

A. It was the regular annual meeting of 
the organization. It had been said that the 
anniversary of the order was the 22d of 
February. It was called in advance of the 
meeting of the Supreme Council to be held 
in New York on the 22d, to enable dele- 
gates to attend that meeting. At that 
meeting an election of officers took place. 

Q. Who were elected ? 

A. H. II. Dodd, Grand Commander, Hor- 
ace Hefiren, Deputy Grand Commander, 
and myself Grand Secretary. 

Q. AVas there any voting in regard to ma- 
jor generals? 

A. The election of major generals took 
place at the same meeting. Humphreys 
was elected in his district, Milligan in his 
district, and Bowles was elected in the 
south-west district. Walker was elected in 
the north-western district. 

Q. Did Yeakle or others resign? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. How did they get out of office ? 

A. All officers were to be elected yearly. 
The fii'st elections were made until the 22d 
day of February. As this was the annual 
meeting, a new election was held, that re- 
sulted as I have just stated. 

Q. Who were the delegates to the New 
York meeting? 

A. Several delegates were elected by the 
Grand Council at the New York meeting. 
I can not say positively who were elected 
in February. 

Q. Can you state some of the delegates 
to the various meetings in September and 
November? 

A. At the meeting in September, John G. 
Davis and D. R. Eckles were elected dele- 
gates to the Council in Chicago, in Septem- 
ber, 1863, and I think Humphreys also. 

Q. To what Council ? 

A. The Supreme Council. Milligan was 
elected delegate to the Supreme Council. 
Dodd was elected to the Supreme Council 
by virtue of his office. 

How many attended ? 

A. I understood Dodd that Milligan was 
present at the meeting of the Supreme 
Council at Chicago or New York, and Hum- 
phreys was present either at the Chicago 
or New York meeting, I do not recollect 
which. Dr. Bowles was present at one or 
both places. The first meeting was held 
in Chicago, in the latter part of the month 
of September, 1863. 

Q. Was Dodd at that meeting? 

A. He left to attend it ; I understood he 
was there himself I understood also that 
Humphreys was present at that meeting, 
and Yeakle and Dr. Bowles. I got this in- 
formation from Dodd. 

Q. Have you no means of telling whether 
Milligan was present at that meeting ? 

A. None but the information I derived 



from Dodd. I have no means of saying 
positively. 

Q. Was any written address read at the 
meeting of February 16th and I7th ? 

A. Yes, sir ; an address was read by Mr. 
Dodd, which was subsequently printed and 
circulated among the members of the 
order. 

Q. How? 

A. An order was passed that the address 
of the Grand Commander and such portion 
of the proceedings of the State Council as 
was necessary should be printed. 

Q. What was that? 

A. That the address of the Grand Com- 
mander, the report of the Grand Secretary, 
and the report of the Finance Committee, 
should be printed. After the meeting ad- 
journed, it was printed in pamphlet form; 
and I sent two copies to each branch Tem- 
ple in the State. 

Q. Did you send to any of the lodges 
where Mr. Milligan lives? 

A. I sent them to Huntington county, 
directing them to Mr. Milligan. 

Q. Did you send any to Mr. Humphreys' 
county ? 

A. Yes, sir ; directing them to Mr. Hum- 
phrej's ? 

Q. How many did you send? 

A. Two of the addresses to each one. 

Q. Did you send any to Dr. Bowles? 

A. I think I did ; I generally sent two to 
each county. 

Q. Did you send any to Mr. Heffren ? 

A. I can not say positively whether I sent 
any to Heffren or not. 

Q. Is that one of the pamphlets you have 
spoken of? 

[A pamphlet entitled " Proceedings of the 
Grand Council of the State of Indiana," 
was here handed to the witness by the 
Judge Advocate.] 

A. It is. 

Q. What does that pamphlet contain ? 

A. It contains an address delivered by 
Dodd, and proceedings of the State Council, 
and the reports of committees. 

Q. Was this pamphlet sent out to the 
counties in which the order existed ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

[The pamphlet entitled " Proceedings of 
the Grand Council of the State of Indiana," 
was here put in evidence by the Judge 
Advocate. See Appendix.] 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Saturday, October 22, 1864, at 10 o'clock, 
A. M 



Court Boou, Indianapolib, Indiana, > 
October 22, 1864, 10 A. M. / 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused, and their 
counsel 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



83 



The proceedings were read and ap- 
proved. 

The accused, Andrew Humphreys, then 
made the following application to the Com- 
mission: 

"I respectfully request that E. H. C. 
€avins, Esq., and William Mack, Esq., may 
be admitted to act as counsel for me upon 
the trial of this cause. 

[Signed.] Andrew Htjmphreys, 

"For himself." 

Which application was granted, and the 
counsel appeared for the accused. 

The testimony of Wm. M. Harrison, a 
witness for the Government, was then con- 
tinued as follows: 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

State what the circular now handed you 
is? 

Answer. This circular is one I sent out to 
the various County Temples, with a copy of 
the Constitution and By-Laws for the 
County and Branch Temples. The circu- 
lar was read to the Court by the Judge Ad- 
vocate. Said circular introduced in evi- 
dence.* 

Q. Did you, or did you not, inclose one 
of these circulars with all the addresses 
you sent to the different County Temples? 

A. With that circular I sent out a copy 
of the Constitution of the Grand Council, 
and one or two copies of the proceedings of 
the meeting held here on the 16th and 17th 
•days of February. 

Q. For what purpose was this assessment 
referred to made ? 

A. For defraying the expenses of the 
Grand Council. 

Q. What was the nature of those ex- 
penses? 

A. Payment for printing, the salary of 
the Secretary, and the payment of the assess- 



Mr. 



^'Office Gbamd Secbetabt, S. L., t 
Indianapolis, , 1864.5 



Dear Sib: Inclosed please find the Constitution for 
the goTernment of County and Branch TempUi, the 
Constitution for the government of the Grand Council, 
and a portion of the proceedings of the Grand Council at 
their meeting held on the 16th and 17th days of Febru- 
ary, 1864:. 

You will find, on reference to the Report of the Finance 
Committee, that the Grand Council has assessed a tax of 
twenty cents on each memberof the organization through- 
out the State, to be paid on or before the first Monday 
in May next. It is also required that each and every 
County Temple in the State send the Grand Secretary 
full reports of the number of their membership, names 
of their officers, and the number of branches organized 
on the first day of May and each three months thereafter. 
Prompt attention to the above is urgently requested. 

The assessment of 820.00 on each county, in addition to 
the twenty centg for each member, is still in force, as far 
as those counties are concerned that have not paid that 
assessment. 

You will please present the papers to your County 
Temple immediately, and see that the above require- 
ments are promptly carried out. 

By the authority of the Supreme Council of the 
United States, there have been some material changes 
made in the Bitual, etc. You will please send an accred- 
ited member of your Temple here, as soon as possible, for 
instruction ; and with him you can send the amount 
due from your county, as the money is absolutely neces- 
•ary, and must be forthcoming. 



ment of the Supreme Council, as well as for 
the payment of rent and other expenses. 

Q. Were any members of the different 
County Temples sent in pursuance of the 
last clause of this circular? 

A. Members were sent with respect to 
the change in the Eitual of the organiza- 
tion. The obligations and the lessons and 
a portion of the passwords and colloquie.» 
had been changed. 

Q. Was there any change in the name of 
order ? 

A. Yes, sir; the name of the order had 
been changed to the Order of the Sons of 
Liberty. 

Q. When and by what authority was that 
change made? 

A. It was made at the meeting of the Su- 
preme Council. I was informed by Dodd 
that the change was made by the authority 
of the Supreme Council on the 22d day of 
February. 

Q. Do your records show any change in 
the name of the order? 

A. No, sir. 1 never made any record of 
the change in the proceedings of the meet- 
ings. 

Q. From whom did you first receive infor- 
mation of the change? 

A. From Dodd. 

Q. What position did he occupy ? 

A. That of Grand Commander of the State 
of Indiana. 

Q. How soon after the 22d day of Febru- 
ary did you learn of this change? 

A. Immediately after the arrival of Dodd 
here ; but 1 can not state positively. It was 
within two or three weeks after the 22d of 
February. 

Q. Was that change made known to the 
subordinate lodges throughout the State? 
If so, how? 

A. It was made known by means of the 
circular just read, and through the agents 
sent out to give information. 

Q. Did any messengers come up from Mr, 
Milligan's district? 

A. I believe there were some from his 
Congressional District. I have no recollec- 
tion of any messengers coming up from his 
county. There were a number of counties 
in that Congressional District that were or- 
ganized in this society. 

Q. Was any person sent up from Mr. 
Humphreys' district or county ? 

A. No, sir; but persons came up from 
Sullivan county to obtain instructions, and 
I believe persons also came up from Vigo 
county for instructions. 

Q. You may state what these changes 
were. 

A. A change was made in the name of 
the organization ; a change was also made 
in the colloquies of the order, in the obli- 
gations, and also in the lessons. 

A pamphlet was here handed to the wit- 
ness. 



84 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Q. Please to examine and state Trhat 
that pamphlet is? 

A. That was the ritual of the Order of 
American Knights; the vestibule lesson 
and the first degree of the Order of Amer- 
ican Knights. 

Q. Does this contain the obligation that 
was required to be taken by every member 
of the Order of American Knights? 

A. I beUeve it does, sir. The obligation 
of the first degree also required in the ves- 
tibule. 

A pamphlet entitled V. was here offered 
in evidence by the Judge Advocate. 

The counsel for the accused objected to its 
introduction, and proposed to ask the wit- 
ness some questions respecting the authen- 
ticity of the pamphlet, to which the Judge 
Advocate objected; the counsel for the ac- 
cused replied: 

May it please the Court: As I discover 
now that many of these documents are to 
be introduced, it is important that we 
should settle the course to be pursued as to 
their introduction, and, therefore, I desire 
to submit the question now. 

It is not sufficient for the Judge Advo- 
cate, in my judgment, to offer such a doc- 
ument as this to the witness, and the 
witness, after glancing over it, to say that it 
is the ritual, without being asked how or 
where he knew it to be such, and by what 
authority it was promulgated. Before the 
document is introduced as evidence, the 
witness should be passed over to the other 
side, and we should be at liberty to cross- 
examine him with respect to this isolated 
fact, of where this document comes from, 
how he knows it, and how he knows it was 
promulgated by competent authority. How 
does he know that it was received and act- 
ed upon. In all courts of justice, before 
a document can be offered in evidence, all 
these distinct facts as to its identity are 
gone into and proved. And when a docu- 
ment has once gone into evidence, we can 
not object to it. If it goes in evidence on 
insufficient identity, how are we to rem- 
edy it? 

It may be said, that if, after the docu- 
ment has once gone in evidence, we show, 
on cross-examination, that it is not prop- 
erly authenticated, the Commission would 
reject it, or give no weight to it. That 
might be true with this Commission, but 
we ought to have the rules of law and cross- 
examination applied here. We all know 
that if we were trying a case of this kind 
before a jury, that the evidence, after once 
getting before the jurors, would have its 
influence, though it were testimony that 
ought not to have been introduced. 

I submit, that before the document can 
be submitted to this Commission, we ought 
to have the privilege of cross-examination, 
confined strictly to the document, its au- 
thenticity, and the propriety of its admis- 



sibility to the Commission as evidence. I 
do not know that this is a matter of very 
much importance, but it is one which we 
may as well settle at once, that we may 
know how we are to be governed here- 
after. 

The Judge Advocate replied : 

It has already been proved before this- 
Commission, that the witness on the stand, 
Mr. Harrison, is Grand Secretary of a so- 
ciety or order, known at present as the 
Order of the Sons of Liberty. That that 
order was changed from the Order of Amer- 
ican Knights. Mr. Harrison stated that he 
belonged to that order ; that he assisted at 
the inauguration of the order, and was one 
of its first members in this city, and that 
he has been its Grand Secretary fi'om that 
time to this. I hand him this paper, and 
ask him what it is. After a careful exam- 
ination, he answers, that it is a ritual of 
the Vestibule and First Degree, and obli- 
gation of the First Degree of the Order of 
American Knights. I then propose to in- 
troduce this paper before the Commi.ssion 
as evidence ; before that they know nothing 
of its contents. 

I differ from the counsel. His right, un- 
der the common law, is to object that the 
paper has not been sufficiently proved. 
The question then arises, has it been so 
brought before this Commission as to make 
it material, and been sufficiently connected 
with the matters in issue to make it im- 
portant that this Commission should call 
that paper before them for their examina- 
tion ? I do distinctly say that the coun- 
sel for the accused can not stop my ex- 
amination, nor have the power to cross-ex- 
amine the witness before I turn him over 
to them for that purpose. He can object 
that I have not sufficiently laid the foun- 
dation of any question, or for any paper 
which I propose to place before the Com- 
mission and thej' pass upon that objection ; 
but he can not ask at my hands that I 
shall turn that witness over to him, until 
I am through with him, and I do not pro- 
pose to do it until the Commission or- 
ders it. 

The objection, as I take it, is to my mode 
of examination, and I insist on the intro- 
duction of the paper, because I consider 
the foundation has been sufficiently laid. 
If the objection is not insisted on, there is 
no question before the court. 

The counsel for the accused replied : 

I interpose the objection that the paper 
should not be received in evidence until 
we have the power at some time — I do not 
care whether it is now or after the Judge 
Advocate has closed his examination, as to 
the paper — to test by a cross-examination 
the authenticity of that document. The 
members of this Commission know, that 
at least in this State, when a note is intro- 
duced into court, before that note shall be 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



85 



offered in evidence, the counsel on the 
■other side are permitted to examine the 
■witness as to its identity and authenticity, 
but not as to its contents. And not until 
that identity and authenticity have been test- 
ed and proved, is the document introduced. 

The court was then closed for delibera- 
tion upon the objection of the accused, as 
to whether the pamphlet should be re- 
ceived in evidence, before the counsel for 
the accused have an opportunity to cross- 
examine the witness upon it. 

On the re-opening of the court, the Judge 
Advocate announced that the objection 
was overruled, and the pamphlet was re- 
ceived in evidence. [See Appendix.] 

Q. State what that is, commencing on 
page 5 ? 

A. That is the obligation of the Neophyte 
in the First Degree. The Neophyte lesson 
Avas the first in the Order of American 
Knights, and given in the Vestibule. 

Q. Wherein do they differ, if at all ? 

A. A person elected to become a member 
of the Neophyte organization, received that 
lesson and no other; he never attended 
any of the meetings of the Order of Amer- 
ican Knights ; he was simply taken into the 
Vestibule, received the obligation, and was 
discharged. 

Q. What was the status of a person 
taking the Neophyte degree ? 

A. All persons becoming members of the 
organization were obliged to take the Neo- 
phyte degree, as the preliminary ; and those 
considered only worthy to take the first 
degree were taken, and the oath adminis- 
tered without their having any knowledge 
of any further degrees. 

Q. State whether or not the change in 
this order released the members from the 
obligations they had taken in the Ameri- 
can Knights? 

A. My understanding was, that when the 
change was made, the members were re- 
leased from the obligations of the Ameri- 
can Knights, and took those of the Sons of 
Liberty. 

Q. Were there any cases in which no 
changes were made in the order, or in the 
change of name ? 

A. We endeavored to make the changes 
as perfect as possible. Each of the counties 
was organized under the Order of Ameri- 
can Knights, and I can not say positively 
that there were any counties in which the 
change was not made, though there may 
have been some that did not send up dele- 
gates. 

Q. Did the Supreme Commander of the 
Sons of Liberty exercise control over the 
American Knights ? 

A. Yes, sir; it is my opinion that he did. 

Q. Upon what do you base that opinion ? 

A. The difference between the Order of 
American Knights and Sons of Liberty was 
this, that when the ritual and obligations 



were changed, it was not necessary for the 
American Knights to take the obligations 
of the Sons of Liberty, but simply to as- 
sume them. It was the same organization 
with a different name, and different ritual 
and colloquies, as I understood it. 

Q. Do you know of any thing being done 
by the Supreme Commander of the Sons 
of Liberty, as to exercising control over 
the American Knights? 

A. I do not know that the present Su- 
preme Commander was ever in the Ameri- 
can Knights? 

Q. Who is that ? 

A. Vallandigham. The Grand Command- 
er of this State was Grand Commander of 
the Order of American Knights, and exer- 
cised the same powers over the Sons of Lib- 
erty. 

Q. After the change, did he exercise the 
same control as before ? 

A. It was considered the same organiza- 
tion. 

Q. I understood you to say that it was 
not necessary to take the obligation of the 
Sons of Liberty, but to assume it. What do 
you mean by that? 

A. The persons taking the obligation of 
the Order of American Knights were not 
required to re-obligate themselves, and 
take the obligation of the Sons of Liberty; 
it was understood that they assumed the 
obligation, and no requirement was made 
or carried into force. None of those who 
took the obligation of the Order of Ameri- 
can Knights took the obligation of the Sons 
of Liberty. 

Q. I understood you that those who went 
into the Sons of Liberty were released from 
the obligation of the Order of American 
Knights — how do you explain it ? 

A. I understood that they were released 
so far as the change was concerned. The 
obligation had been changed, and it was 
understood that they assumed the new obli- 
gation. 

Q. If they took any new obligation, were 
they or were they not released from the ob- 
ligation ? 

A. I never perfectly understood whether 
they were or not. 

Q. Were they held to the old obligation, 
supposing they took no new obligation? 

A. They were supposed to be held to the 
obligation they had taken. 

[Certain pamphlets were handed to the 
witness.] 

Q. State if you know what those are? If 
so, state what they are? 

A. This book (entitled "S. L.") I know to 
be the ritual of the first degree, containing 
the first lesson of the Order of Sons of 
Libert J'. This (entitled "General Laws of 
the S. L.") is the Constitution of the County 
Temple of the State. This (entitled ''Con- 
stitution of the Grand Council," etc.,) is the 
Constitution of the Grand Council of this 



86 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



State for the Sons of Liberty. This (entitled 
"I") is the ritual of the First Conclave de- 
gree, or second degree of the Order of Sons 
of Liberty, and also the Second Conclave or 
third degree of the Order of Sons of Lib- 
erty. 

Q. Who were required to take the obliga- 
tions contained in these Rituals? 

A. All persons who became members of 
those degrees. Those who had become 
members of the Order of American Knights 
(of the second and third degree) simply 
assumed the obligations of the new order. 

The above-named Rituals were here put 
in evidence on the part of the Court. [See 
Appendix.] 

Q. I understand you to say that this new 
order of things was brought about after the 
return of the Grand Commander from New 
York. Am I correct? 

A. Yes, sir ; it was after his return from 
New York, but I can not say positively' how 
long after. 

Q. When was the next meeting after that 
of the 16th and 17th of February? and 
where? 

A. The next meeting of the Grand Coun- 
cil of this State was on the 14th of June, 
1864, at the Hall of Marion Temple. 

Q. How many counties of the State were 
represented at that meeting? 

A. About thirty counties. 

Q. How many delegates to a county? 

A. Some counties had one, some two, and 
some more than two. 

Q. How many delegates were present at 
the meeting? 

A. I should judge about forty members. 

Q. Who presided at that meeting? 

A. The Grand Commander, Mr. Dodd. 

Q. Who was Secretary ? 

A. I was. 

Q. Who, if any of the accused, were 
present at that meeting? 

A. Mr. Bowles, Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Mil- 
ligan and Mr. Horsey were present at that 
meeting. A gentleman by the name of 
Stephen Horsey was present, but I do not 
know whether he (the accused) is the man 
or not; I do not recognize him ; at all events 
he was a delegate from Martin county. 

Q. Did any initiations take place at that 
time? 

A. Those members who were present who 
had not received the Council Degree, received 
it at that meeting, but I do not recollect 
who took it. 

Q. Do you remember whether a Mr. La- 
salle was present at that meeting? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where is Lasalle from? 

A. From Cass county. I do not know his 
name, but I think it is Charles. 

Q. Do you remember any persons of this 
city who were initiated? 

A. There were no persons from this city 
initiated. 



Q. Commence at the convening of the 
Council and give to the Commission, as 
nearly as you can, what took place in de- 
tail; how and by whom it was opened, how 
you gained admittance, and what was done? 

A. The Grand Council convened about 
10 o'clock on the morning of the 14th of 
June, and was in session till 5 or 6 in the 
evening. I remember that I was very late at 
the meeting. It was delayed on account of 
my absence. It was convened by the Grand 
Commander, who delivered a short verbal 
address at the opening of the meeting. I 
have no recollection as to what was said in 
the address. The next business in order 
was conferring the Grand Council Degree 
upon those members that had not received 
them. 

Q. Was the Grand Council Degree supe- 
rior to the Third Degree? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who was entitled to receive that de- 
gree? 

A. Those persons who were present who 
had not received it before. 

Q. Did any member receive that degree ? 

A. No person was given that degree un- 
less he was elected as a delegate to the State- 
Council ; every delegate to the State Coun- 
cil was bound to receive that degree before 
he could act as a member of the Council. 

Q. What was done after the sj^eech? 

A. There was general business transacted, 
the most important, I think, was the apiDoint- 
ment of a committee of thirteen, whose 
duty it was to act in the interim of the 
meeting of the State Council, and to exer- 
cise the same power that the State Council 
had. 

Q. Who was appointed on that committee ? 

A. I can not say; it was a secret commits 
tee; tiie appointing power was placed in the 
hands of the Grand Commander, Dodd, wha 
was suj^posed to be, ex oficio^ a member of 
that committee, and had the appointing of 
them. It was intended to be a secret com- 
mittee, that should not be known, even to 
the members themselves, until they were 
called together. 

Q. Do you know whether or not they 
were called together? 

A. I do not. 

Q. Do you know of any address being is- 
sued by them? 

A. I have no knowledge of any, save a 
printed one, that I have seen since 1 have 
been in jjrison; but I knew nothing about 
it before. 

Q. What was done after the appointment 
of the committee of thirteen? 

A. After discussions on political matters, 
there was a resolution to appoint a com- 
mittee of five to proceed to Hamilton, 01. io, 
on the next day, the 15th.* That resolution 
afterward was amended, by authorizing all 



*Thc occasion of Mr. Vallandigbam's return to Ohio. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



87 



the members to consider themselves mem- 
bers of that committee. A resolution was 
also brought up with respect to Govern- 
ment detectives becoming members of the 
organization. It was understood that some 
Government detectives had become initia- 
ted as members of the organization, and 
a discussion took place, to find whether it 
was the case or not. 

Q. Was any one named ? 

A. A man by the name of Coffin was said 
to belong, and there was a general discus- 
sion in reference to the looseness of the 
manner in which the initiations were car- 
ried on, and an appeal made to the mem- 
bers to be more particular in future. 

Q. Was any thing said as to what was to 
be done in the matter ? 

A. Nothing within my recollection or 
knowledge came before the meeting in a 
business capacity. 

Q. Did any thing come before the meet- 
ing in an unofficial capacity ? or did you 
learn what was to be done ? 

A. No, sir; I did not; but I heard Mr. 
Dodd remark that a person who came into 
the organization as a Government detective 
ought to be made away with ; it was a re- 
mark made in private conversation, and 
was not brought before the meeting offi- 
cially. 

Q. Was that remark made during the 
meeting? 

A. It was during the meeting that I heard 
it. 

Q. What other business was done at that 
meeting ? 

A. I can not recollect any other particu- 
lar business, save that there were resolu- 
tions pa-ssed in reference to the increase of 
the organization. I looked upon it at the 
time as an unimportant meeting. There 
was no important business transacted. 

Q. Do you know whether or not any per- 
son did go to Hamilton ? 

A. Not of my own knowledge. 

Q. Were any other officers or men ap- 
pointed ? or any other formal business done 
at the meeting ? 

A. No, sir; the officers for the present 
year had all been appointed at the meet- 
ing in February. 

Q. How was that meeting adjourned? 

A. Sine die. 

Q. Was the June meeting a regular meet- 
ing of the Council ? 

A. It was a called meeting, called by the 
Grand Commander, through printed no- 
tices issued by me, and sent by mail. He 
requested me to issue notices to the various 
County Temples, calling a meeting on the 
14th of June. That was the last meeting 
of the Grand Council held that I attended, 
and I believe there has been no other 
meeting of the Grand Council held since 
that time, either here, or in any portion of 
the State. 



Q. Do you remember what the strength 
of the order was computed to be at the 
meeting in June ? 

A. At the meeting in February I received 
reports from seventeen counties, who re- 
ported the strength within their limits at 
something over five thousand members. 
There were some seventeen to twenty other 
counties that made no reports. I computed 
their number at twelve thousand. From 
the reports made in June, there was an in- 
crease in the organization of about twenty 
per cent, making it about fifteen thousand. 

Q. What did you compute it to be in 
September, from the best data you had at 
that time ? 

A. Taking the ratio of increase from Feb- 
ruary to June, I should not have put the 
organization to exceed eighteen thousand 
members. 

Q. In this number do you include the 
Order of American Knights, and Sons of 
Liberty, all who had taken any of the de- 
grees ? 

A. I mean that it includes the members 
of first, second and third degree, members 
of the organization, but it would not in- 
clude the members of the Vestibule, sim- 
ply because there was no report made of 
those members, they were not considered 
members of the organization. As a gen- 
eral thing, the Vestibule members were very 
few. 

Q. You may name the counties in which 
this organization existed as far as you can ? 

A. I can not name all of them. The or- 
ganization, so far as I have received reports, 
existed in the counties of Marion, Marshall, 
Allen, Huntington, Laporte, Fulton, Cass, 
Harrison, Washington, Orange, Grant, Madi- 
son, Crawford, Posey, Vanderburg, and War- 
rick. The reports received were from forty- 
five counties in all. 

Q. Did this order exist in Eandolph 
county, to your knowledge ? 

A. 1 never received any report of the es- 
tablishment of any County Temple. There 
may have been branch Temples; but the 
order existed to no extent in that county ? 

Q. How about Dearborn county ? 

A. So far as I can recollect, there was no 
organization in that county. 

Q. Was Eandolph county represented in 
any of these meetings by delegates ? 

A. I think not, sir ; but I will not state 
positively. 

Q. Was Cass county represented ? 

A. Yes, sir ; by Mr. Lasalle. 

Q. Was Howard county represented ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do yovi know any thing of the strength 
of the organization in adjoining States? 

A. Nothing positive. I understood that 
the order was better organized in Illinois 
than in any other State in the Union. But 
I had no information that was official. 

Q. State to the Commission whether any 



88 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



steps were taken, to your knowledge, and 
if so how far, for the arming or drilling of 
the organization? 

A. There was, to my knowledge, no reso- 
lution passed at the meeting of the State 
Council to arm this organization, or looking 
to the arming or purchase of arms, or to 
the drilling of the organization. 

Q. I ask you whatt, to your knowledge, 
was done ? 

A. I have no knowledge of the ai'ming or 
drilling of the members of the organization. 

Q. Do you know of any attempt to arm 
the organization ? 

A. I do not know any thing at all about 
arms, except those that were seized here 
last August. 

Q. What was done or said in an official 
way, looking to the drilling and arming of 
the organization, and any acts of the leaders. 

A. I have no knowledge of the purchase 
of any arms, or any attempt to arm the 
organization, or of the organization or any 
portion of it being under drill. 

Q. What do you know about the arms 
seized here? 

A. I had no knowledge of the purchase or 
the shipment of these arms until about four 
or five days previous to their arrival. Mr. 
Walker came to my house one night, be- 
tween 9 and 10 o'clock. He asked me if 
I knew whether Mr. Dodd had informed 
Parsons that there would be some boxes 
coming here addressed to him. I told him 
I did not. He then said that he should 
like me to say to Parsons that there would 
be some boxes arriving in a day or two, 
which he would like him to take in and 
take care of until he returned. I can not 
say whether Walker stated at that inter- 
view that these boxes contained arms or 
not. I went down the next morning and 
asked Parsons if Dodd had informed him 
that these boxes were coming. He said 
that he had, and that he had received the 
information. I left the city on that day, 
and was absent three or four days. The 
morning after my return to the city, I went 
down to Dodd's office, and I saw on the 
sidewalk five or six boxes addressed " J. J. 
Parsons, Indianapolis, Ind." Parsons was 
engaged in getting these boxes into the 
building. I asked him if these were the 
boxes spoken of, and he said they were. 
The boxes were taken up to the second 
floor, and put in a back room of the build- 
ing. I went there as they had been placed 
there, and asked him if he knew what 
those boxes contained. He said he did. 
I asked him what they contained. He said 
pistols. 

Q. Was Mr. Parsons a member of the 
Order of Sons of Liberty ? 

A. He was, sir. He gave me the infor- 
mation as to what the boxes contained. 

Q. Did he say what they were for ? 

A. No, sir. 



Q. Did Dodd say what they were for ? 

A. No, sir. Dodd never mentioned the 
boxes or pistols in any manner. 

Q. How many boxes were received here 
at that time ? 

A. I understood ten boxes were received. 

Q. Were any more received? 

A. Yes, sir. Twenty-two boxes were re- 
ceived about two weeks after. 

Q. Did you learn who had purchased or 
shipped these arms ? 

A. I never learned who purchased these 
arms until after I was arrested, when I saw 
the card published by Mr. Walker. I do 
not know of my own knowledge. 

Q. What became of these arms ? 

A. I understood that they were seized by 
the authorities here. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with 
Parsons about the dispositions of these 
arms ? 

A. No, sir. I think Mr. Parsons knew 
nothing about the matter until the arms 
had been shipped, and until a few days 
previous to their arrival. It is my im- 
pression he derived his information from 
Dodd. 

The Judge Advocate here handed the 
witness a letter, and asked : 

Q. Do you know by whom that letter 
was written ? 

A. That letter is in Mr. Walker's hand- 
writing, I should judge, but I could not 
swear particularly to it. 

Q. Did you ever see that letter before? 

A. I never did, sir. 

The letter dated "New York, May 11, 
1864," addressed to "My Dear Dodd," and 
signed " Yours truly, W.," was here intro- 
duced in evidence by the Judge Advocate. 

The Judge Advocate handed a letter to 
the accused, L. P. Milligan, and asked: "Is 
that your handwriting?" 

A. The accused, L P. Milligan, replied 
"that is my handwriting." 

A letter, dated "Huntington, 9th May, 
1864," addressed to "Gen. H. H. Dodd," 
and signed "L. P. Milligan," was here in- 
troduced in evidence by the Judge Advo- 
cate.* 



■fHuNTiNOTON, In»., 9th May, 1864. 

Gen. H. H. Dodd— Dear Str : Tours of the 2d inst. 
came when I was absent at Notre Dame, and I have now 
just read it, and am unable to make any definite reply. 
I will barely allude to what may afford a text for reply 
in future. 

As to the Gubernatorial question, it may not have oc- 
curred to you the unenvialile connection in which my 
name has been used. It was announced in consequence 
of the declination of the Hon. J. E. McDonald to be a 
candidate, conceding that if he was a candidate there was 
no desire to use my name ; now I understand he «s; hence 
I am not called upon by any public notice to be such. 
But waiving all this as the result of mere accident, and 
not proffered as an indignity to me, by placing me second 
in talents and imtriotisra to J. E. McDonald, there is 
a still more grave difficulty in the way. The announce- 
ment of my name for Governor, was made by McDonald's 
friends. Now it is due to them that I should decline, 
because I could not represent thom ; there is no similar- 
ity between us. And all this is not so discouraging as the 
fact that men of the stamp of Judge Hanua, whose pro- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



89 



Q. Do you know P. C. "Wright? 

A. The first time I met him was at Terre 
Haute, about the 27th of August, 1863. In 
a conversation I had with him, he informed 
me that he had originally resided at New 
Orleans. That he had been compelled to 
leave there on account of his Union senti- 
ments, and removed to St. Louis, Missouri. 
At the time I saw him, he was staying in 
Chicago, and represented himself to be an 
Attorney at Law. 

Q. Do you know where he is now? 

A. I do not know positively, but I under- 
stood he was in Fort Lafayette. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Tuesday, October 25, at 2 o'clock, P. M. 



CouET Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana 

October 25, 1864., 2 o'clock, P. M 



The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused and their 
counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

Edwin A. Davis, one of the counsel for 
Andrew Humphreys and Horace Heffren, 
submitted to the Commission the following 
paper: 

To the President and Members of the Military 
Commission : 

At the commencement of this trial, two of 
the defendants asked and obtained leave of 
this Court for me to act as their counsel. I 
now, with their consent, desire to withdraw 
from the position I have since then occu- 
pied, in such a manner as not to prejudice 
their interest before this tribunal. 

The determination of the Court that all 
the defendants should be tried jointly, in- 
sures them all able and experienced coun- 
sel. 

I may also say, that when I was retained 
in behalf of the defendants, I had but little 
idea of the nature of the charges and evi- 



fession of principles I conld represent, prefer McDonald 
on account of his supposed ayailability, it detracts much 
from my confidence in our ultimate success. When men 
of so much seeming patriotism are willing for mere tem- 
porary purposes to abandon the great principles of civil 
liberty, what will those of less pretensions do, when the 
real contest comes, when life and property all depend on 
the issue, when bullets instead of ballots are cast, and 
when the halter is a preamble to our platform ? For un- 
less Federal encroachments are arrested in the States by 
the effort as well of the legislators as the executive, then 
win our lives and fortunes follow where our honors will 
have gone before. 

I am willing to do whatever the cause of the North-west 
may require, or its true friends may think proper, but I 
am" as well convinced that upon mature reflection they 
will not ask me to obtrude myself upon the public, nor 
will they ask me to be McDonald's contingent. 

I have great confidence in your good hard man sense, 
and cool judgment, hence I find it difficult to disregard 
your advice in the matter, and before giving to the 
world my position ou the question I wish to see vou per- 
sonally. Yours truly, L. P. MILLIGAN. 

N. B. My last was confidential ; this is more so, be- 
cause I have given vent to feelings that are purely 
private. L. P. MILLIGAN. 



dence that would be produced against them; 
but from the nature of these prosecutions, 
and for other reasons growing out of my re- 
lation to the Government as United States 
Commissioner, which renders it improper 
that I should defend a class of cases fre- 
quently brought before me as an examining 
officer of the Government, I ask of this 
Court that my request be granted, and these 
reasons for my withdrawal be spread upon 
the records of the Court. 

EDWIN A. DAVIS. 

The request of Mr. Davis was granted by 
the Commission. 

The testimony of William M. Harrison, a 
witness for the Government, was then re- 
sumed as follows: 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

State whether a Military Committee was 
appointed at the meeting of the Grand 
Council, on the 14th of June? and if so, 
who were appointed? 

A. I have no recollection of the appoint- 
ment of such a committee at that meeting. 

Q. Did you receive any reports from any 
of the accused, relative to the strength of 
the organization in their respective coun- 
ties? 

A. I received a report from Mr. Heffren, 
at the meetings of the 16th and 17th of 
February, of its strength in his county. 
I have no recollection of any report from 
others. 

The Judge Advocate here handed the 
witness a letter addressed to " H. I. Stew- 
art, Boundary, Indiana," and signed " H.," 
and asked : 

Q. Do you recognize the handwriting of 
that paper, and know by whom it was 
written ? 

A. Yes, sir. It was written by me as 
Secretary of the order, on the day on which 
it is dated, in reply to a letter addressed to 
me as Secretary by H. I. Stewart. 

Q. Was he a member of the order ? 

A. The letter was from a man I had 
never heard of before I had received it. 
The writer purported to be Secretary of a 
County Temple. He wrote on business 
connected with the order. 

The Judge Advocate here proposed to in- 
troduce the letter in evidence. The coun- 
sel for the accused objected for the follow- 
ing reasons: 

That the letter is a reply to a communi- 
cation from a person not yet proven to be 
a member of the order. It is an immate- 
rial letter, and proves nothing in issue be- 
fore this Court. 

The Judge Advocate replied : 

There are several issues presented in this 
case, which I view differently from the 
counsel for the accused. Mr. Harrison says 
this letter was written by him in his official 
capacity as Grand Secretary, to a man 
whom he supposed was a member of the 
order. Any instructions the witness gave, 



90 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



whether written or verbal, in reference 
to the order, are competent as evidence, 
and are competent as showing how the 
order worked, and whether its affairs were 
conducted in an open or secret manaer. 
Instructions given to any temple, are also 
competent evidence. 

The counsel for the accused wished the 
objection to go on record, that the letter 
might go in as evidence, under protest. 

The Judge Advocate replied : 

There can be no protest in this Court. 
If objections are made by the counsel for 
the accused, they come before the Court to 
be sustained or overruled. 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. 

On the re-opening of the court room, the 
Judge Advocate announced to the accused 
that the objection had been overruled by 
the Commission, and the letter was received 
in evidence.* 

The letter was here read by the Judge 
Advocate. 

Question by the Judge Advocate: I un- 
derstood you to say this letter was never 
sent ; how was that ? 

A. I wrote the letter the same day I re- 
ceived the letter from Stewart. I had in 
a measure become dissatisfied with the or- 
der, and had resolved to abandon it. I 
hesitated about answering any letters, but 
wrote this on the spur of the moment and 
placed it in my pocket, without determin- 
ing whether I should send it. I was arrest- 
ed, and this letter was found upon me and 
taken from me. 

Q. When were you arrested? 

A. On Saturday, the day the letter was 
written. 

Question by the Court: 

Q Did an answer to the letter from H. I. 
Stewiirt come within the general scope of 
your duties as Grand Secretary ? 

A. I answered every letter that came di- 
rected to me as Grand Secretary, without 
any special directions from the Council. 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

State to the Court if there ever came to 
yoiu" knowledge any plan for the intended 
uprising of this order? If so, state from 
whom you obtained that knowledge, where 
the uprising was to be, and all the circum- 
stances connected with it. 

A. I received my information from Har- 
rison II. Dodd, that there was a design in 
progress, or in contemplation i'or the release 
of the prisoners of war confined at this 
point, at Chicago, and at Rock Island, Illi- 



<• Indianapolis, August 20, 1864. 
Mr. H. I. Stewart, Bouudnry, Indiaua — Dear Sir: 
YoiirH uiiiier date (if the 17th instant is at hand. Any 
infiirniatinri that you niaydi'siic can be had by sending 
an accredited jierROn here. Written coinmunicatione are 
jpUiyed oitt, as all letters are ojiened and read by Lincoln 
spies and hirelings during their transmission through 
the mails. The Keader can be had at SI -0 per dozen. 
Truly yours, H. 



nois. That plan had not been fully de- 
cided on ; but if decided on, he was to have 
charge of the release of the prisoners at 
this point. He desired to have a Demo- 
cratic mass meeting called about the 16th 
of August, and used his influence to induce 
the Democratic State Central Committee 
to call that meeting. If they did so, he in- 
tended to send out circulars to the mem- 
bers of the order in the various counties, 
authorizing the members to come up to that 
meeting armed. If the meeting had been 
held at that time, there would have been 
an uprising. 

Q. When and where did he state this to 
you ? 

A. At his residence, on the evening of 
the 29th of July I think. It was on Fri- 
day evening, the same evening that the 
bulletin board of the Journal office an- 
nounced that there would be a full exposi- 
tion of the Order of the Sons of Liberty in 
the Journal of the next morning. 

Q. Was that prior or subsequent to the 
meeting at Chicago, to which you have al 
luded? 

A. It was after the Chicago meeting. 

Q. Did Dodd at that time state to you 
when and where this plan for revolution 
had been agreed upon ? 

A. He stated to me that he had been to 
Niagara Falls, and from there to New York 
City; that he returned again to Niagara 
Falls, and from there he went to Chicago. 
I understood him that this whole plot had 
been arranged at Chicago. 

Q. Did he give the names of the persons 
whom he consulted in reference to this 
plan? 

A. He mentioned no names, 

Q. Did he mention whom he had met at 
Niagara Falls? 

A. He stated that he met there the par- 
ties representing themselves as Peace Com- 
missioners. 

Q. At what date and to whom did he re- 
fer ? 

A. It was about the time of the meeting 
of the Peace Commissioners at Niagara 
Falls. I suppose he referred to the Peace 
Commissioners on the part of the rebel 
States. 

Q. Did he state what the rebel prison- 
ers were to do after the uprising on the 
16th? 

A. He stated, in an informal way, that 
they were to aid and assist in the uprising 
here. 

Q. What were they to do after the upris- 
ing? 

A. If successful in the upi'ising, they 
were to be taken South. 

Q. What was that success to consist in ? 

A. In revolution. 

Q. What was to be revolutionized ? 

A. The Government, as far as the State 
was concerned. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



91 



Q. Did he have reference to the General 
Government ? 

A. He said nothing about the General 
Government. It was a revolution which 
was to take place in this State. 

Q. How was this uprising to take place, 
and at whom was it aimed ? 

A. By the aid of the rebel prisoners, who 
were to be released through his instrumen- 
tality, and that of the persons who came in 
to the meeting to be held here on the 16th, 
they were to have an uprising and overturn 
the State Government. 

Q. Who was to be Governor after that rev- 
olution ? 

A. He did not state. 

Q. Did he state particularly his plan for 
the release of the rebel prisoners, and how 
the guards were to be overpowered ? 

A. He said if the thing was decided on, 
he was to release the prisoners here. He 
was to surprise the camp, and seize the ar- 
tillery here, and in the confusion and ex- 
citement of the moment effect the success 
of the plan. He thought he could do this 
with about one hundred and fifty men. 
That was his idea which he communica- 
ted to me? 

Q. You may state whether there is an 
unwritten work of the order ? 

A. There is. 

Q. You may now give to the Court an ex- 
position of what that is, giving the collo- 
quies, signs, grips and passwords. 

A. The unwritten work of the order con- 
sists in the signs, grips, passwords and col- 
loquies of the order. That portion of the 
work of the organization was never written, 
but communicated verbally. 

Q. You may now give the unwritten part 
of the Vestibule degree? 

A. The Vestibule lesson is that in which all 
persons who design to become members of 
the order are first instructed. It was so 
arranged that a person who took the Vesti- 
bule degree, knew nothing beyond that. In 
a large city they could have societies of 
the Sons of Liberty, composed of members 
who had gone no further than the Vestibule 
lesson, and meet as general political clubs. 
They would be bound by the obligations of 
the Sons of Liberty, but know nothing 
further of the organization than that lesson. 

The sign of recognition was made by 
standing erect on both feet, placing the heel 
of the right foot in the hollow of the left, 
with the arms folded in the ordinary man- 
ner. A member of the order noticing me 
in this posture, would suppose he was 
challenged. He would place himself in the 
same position and challenge me. He would 
extend his right foot to meet mine and use 
the following colloquy: I would say "nu," 
he would answer "oh," I would reply "lac," 
he would say "S.." I would answer "L.," he 
would say, "Give me liberty" — I would an- 
6wer "or give me death." There is also a 



signal of distress. You place the left hand 
on the right breast, and raise the right hand 
directly in front to its full hight once. This 
is given in the day-time. If at night, you 
give the cry of distress "oak-houn," repeated 
three times. You wait a moment, and then 
repeat it three times, and continue this un- 
til assistance comes. The members of this 
degree were also instructed that it was the 
duty of each member of the order to repair 
immediately to the spot and assist the mem- 
ber giving the signal. They were also in- 
structed that the acorn was the universal 
emblem of the society. If the person was 
not deemed worthy to take any further de- 
grees he was dismissed. The members of 
that degree never knew any thing officially 
of the further organization of the order. 

In the first degree the sign of recognition 
is the same as in the Vestibule degree, ex- 
cept that the index finger of the left hand 
was placed on the right arm, when the arms 
were folded. We were instructed that this 
meant State rights and State sovereignty. 
If a member gave that sign, it was the duty 
of another seeing it, to advance and recog- 
nize him. The grip of the first degree is an 
ordinary grip, in which the index finger is 
placed upon the wrist, extending upward. 
That is entitled the grip of the acorn. The 
colloquy is repeated thus: "If I go to the 
East" — "I will go to the West." "Let there 
be no strife" — "between mine and thine" — 
"for we" — "be brethren." "0 ' — "S" — ^"L" — 
"Resistance to tyrants" — "is obedience to 
God." [The colloquies are pronounced al- 
ternately, as indicated by the dashes.] This 
is the colloquy of the first degree. In this 
degree members were instructed in the 
mode of entering a temple. The password 
of that degree was changed monthly in each 
County Temple, which adopted its own 
password. The members were instructed 
that the acorn was the universal emblem 
of the order, representing strength, growth, 
and durability. Those initiated into this 
degree were welcomed as full members of 
the Order of Sons of Liberty. 

The sign of recognition of the second de- 
gree is given with the body in the same po- 
sition as in the first degree, the hands being 
crossed on the abdomen, the right hand on 
the left and the thumbs pointing ujjward to 
a point, which is said to represent the star 
Arcturus. The colloquy is: "What — a star — 
Arc — turns. What of the night ? — Morning 
cometh — Will ye inquire ? — inquire ye — re- 
turn — come." Members wei'e instructed 
that a five-pointed star of any metal could 
be used as an emblem of that degree. The 
password was "Orion," pronounced as a test, 
by giving the long sound to "i" in the sec- 
ond syllable. This is the unwritten por- 
tion of the second degree, except the man- 
ner of entering the temple. 

The third degree is similar to the second 
in the position of the body. The signof recog- 



92 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



nition is made by crossing the arms on the 
chest, the right arm upon the left, and the 
fingers pointing to the shoulders. The col- 
loquy is: "Whence — seir? How — by the 
ford ? Name it — Jaback — Your password 
— Washington." The response is "Bayard." 
The distinct pronunciation of the last syl- 
lable, "yari," being a test of membership. 

The sign of the Grand Council degree is 
given by clasping the right hand, and taking 
hol'd of the elbow of the right arm with 
the left hand ; then give a simple shake of 
the hand; turn one quarter to the left, with 
the arms folded, and repeat the colloquy : 
" Whence — Amei'ica — North — South." The 
password of the Grand Council degree is 
"America." 

A member who wishes to enter a Temple 
of the first degree, makes some alarm at the 
outer door If he is known to be a Son of 
Liberty, he would be admitted on giving the 
password, without any further trouble. If 
not known, he gives the password and is 
admitted into the ante-room, and sends in 
his name and that of the County Temple to 
which he belongs, and states that he is a 
visiting brother. His name is reported to the 
presiding officer. When the name is an- 
nounced to the members present, if any know 
him they vouch for him ; if not vouched for, 
a committee of two is appointed to test him 
in the degree in which the Council is work- 
ing. If found perfect, he is admitted ; if 
he fails, he is rejected. The manner of 
entering Temples working in other degrees, 
is the same, with the exception of the pass- 
word used. 

Close of the direct examination. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

There were no other lessons or teachings 
pertaining to the unwritten work of the 
other degrees, than those I have given. The 
military features of the Order of the Ameri- 
can Knights and the Sons of Liberty were 
the same. From what Dodd communicated 
to me, I was impressed that the revolutionary 
scheme included Illinois as well as Indiana, 
and that himself mainly, and certain others 
who knew of the intended scheme, as far as 
it was decided upon, were to participate in 
carrying it out, and in the event of circum- 
stances favoring, the whole organization was 
to be drawn into it. The intended revolu- 
tion was not discussed in Council; Dodd 
seemed to look rather to the action of in- 
dividual members of the order in this State. 
He was to take charge of the liberation of 
the prisoners at Camp Morton, near this 
city. Dodd remarked to me that he wanted 
to influence the State Central Committee to 
call a Democratic mass meeting here about 
the 16th of August. If it had been called 
he was to issue secret circulars to members 
of the order, and have them come armed 
and prepared for an uprising. I do not be- 
lieve that the majority of the first and sec- 



ond degree members ever knew or thought 
that revolution in Indiana was contemplated. 
Dodd, I know, contemplated holding a meet- 
ing here, of the leading men of the organi- 
zation, for the discussion of his plans, and 
the meeting, I understood, took place on 
the Tuesday following the Friday on which 
I had the conversation referred to. The 
meeting was convened by circular sent by 
Mr. Dodd. The military bill adopted in the 
Council, referred to in my direct examina- 
tion, was introduced in pursuance of injunc- 
tions received from Mr. Wright, the origi- 
nator of the organization in this State. His 
instructions were that the order must have 
a certain number of major generals, briga- 
diers, colonels, etc. Mr. Wright was Su- 
preme Commander at the time. The mili- 
tary bill was in Dodd's handwriting. The 
military appointments were made by the 
delegates present from various military dis- 
tricts, who selected a person for major 
general for their district; that person was 
announced to the Council, and die nomina- 
tion confirmed in Council. I can not state 
positively whether Mr. Milligan was present 
or not when the military bill was discussed. 
Neither Mr. Heflren nor Mr. Humphreys 
was present. These appointments were 
made at the first meeting held about the 
10th of September, 1863. Heflren was 
present at the meeting of the 16th and 17th 
of February, and that was the only meeting 
I ever saw him at. Bowles in the February 
meeting declined becoming a major general 
unless certain changes were made in the 
length of the term of service. The change I 
understood was made, and I did not hear him 
object after that. I have no knowledge as 
to Humphreys accepting his nomination. 
He was not present at either the February 
or September meetings; but was present 
here at the June, 1864, meeting; though I 
did not see him in the room till the even- 
ing, and then only for half or three-quarters 
of an hour. I did not see him at the Terre 
Haute meeting. I know that Mr. Hum- 
phreys was a member of the order from the 
fact that I saw him at the meeting on the 
14th of June, but have no knowledge of his 
initiation, nor of that of a majority of the 
members of that Council. No person who 
was not a member, ever, to my knowledge, 
entered the Grand Council. It convened in 
the Marion County Temple, in the fourth 
story of Dodd's building, and was in session 
from 10 in the morning until 9 in the even- 
ing, adjourning for dinner and supper. Mr. 
Humphreys was there at night. I saw him 
there, and also saw him at my office after 
the meeting adjourned. Mr. Dodd told me 
he saw the Peace Commissioners at Niagara 
Falls, and had conversations with several of 
them, but did not say any thing about meet- 
ing them in a secret manner; I do not know 
whether he was conspiring with them, or 
was simply introduced to them. I know that 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



93 



Mr. HeftVen was Deputy Grand Commander, 
but never heard from him in reference to 
the organization after the 17th of February; 
he was not present at any meeting after 
that. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 
Who were the parties that were sent for 
to be present at the Tuesday meeting ? 

A. Mr. Dodd informed me that he in- 
tended sending for Mi-. Milligan, for Dr. 
Bowles, Mr. Humphreys, and Dr. Yeakle; 
those are all that I recollect his mentioning 
to me. 

Q. Did you learn whether he sent for 
those persons ? 

A. I did not; from him. 
Q. Did you learn it from any other mem- 
ber of the order? 

A. Dodd told me he had sent his boy for 

one of those parties, and he sent me for 

another of the parties. He said he sent his 

boy to Dr. Bowles; I went to Mr. Milligan. 

Q. Did you see him? 

A. I did. 

Q. Did you tell him your message? 
A. I did. 

Q. What did he say? 
A. He said that he did not know whether 
he could be present, but would try to be. I 
was instructed by Mr. Dodd to say that 
there would be a very important meeting, 
and he ought to be present. I do not know 
whether they were present or not. 

Q. How do you recollect the presence of 
Mr. Humphreys on the 14th of June? 

A. He had never been present at any 
meeting before. 

Q. Was your mind specially directed to 
him? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you see him enter the room? 
A. I do not recollect seeing him enter it. 
I saw him in the room just previous to the 
adjournment. 

Q. Were any persons admitted to the 
Grand Council who were not members be- 
fore ? 

A. No, sir; not to my knowledge. 
Q. Could any person have obtained ad- 
mittance except through the regular pro- 
cess of working into the meeting ? 

A. No person who was not a member 
could gain admittance. Those delegates 
who were not members of the Grand Coun- 
cil degree, were initiated. They had to be 
delegates to be initiated in the degree, and 
become members of the Grand Council. 

Q. In case that uprising was to have taken 
place, who was the proper ofl&cer to lead the 
uprising ? 

A. I should judge Mr. Dodd was the of- 
ficer. 

Q. Had he the power, in an oflBcial capa- 
city, to order that here? 
A. It was vested entirely in Mr. Dodd. 



Q. Had he the power to order members 
of the order at will ? 

A. He had. 

Q. Did he have the power to call all 
meetings? 

A, Yes, sir. 

Question by the Court: 

Was the circular sent which said he would 
send to the difierent temples, directing the 
members to appear here at the Democratic 
Convention armed? 

A. He did not send any to my knowledge. 
He did not say he had sent them. 

Q. Was the convention called? 

A. It was not. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Thursday, the 27th of October, 1864, at 
10 o'clock, A. M. 

CotiRT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
October 27, 1864, 10 o'clock, A. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the' 
Judge Advocate, the accused, and their 
counsel. 

The proceedings wei'e read and approvea. 

The whole of the session being occupied 
in reading the testimony, the Commission 
adjourned, to meet at 2 o'clock, P. M. 

CocET Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
October 27, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused, and their 
counsel. 

Wesley Tranter, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

State your name and place of residence. 

Answer. Wesley Tranter ; Shoals Station, 
Martin county, Indiana, has been my home 
for four years. 

Q. What has been your business for the 
last year ? 

A. I have been running a saw-mill and 
building bridges down South. My occupa- 
tion before was that of a miller. 

Q. State whether or not you ever joined 
a society called the Knights of the Golden 
Circle, American Knights, or Sons of Lib- 
erty? 

A. Yes, sir; I joined an order in May, 
1863, called the Circle of Honor; the last I 
joined was called the Knights of the Golden 
Circle. 

Q. Where was that? 

A. It was close to the Shoals. 

Q. How long did you belong to that or 
ganization ? 

A. Up to January, 1864, when it was 
turned into the Knights of the Golden Cir- 
cle, the second degrea 



94 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Q. State the circumstances of your join- 
ing the Circle of Honor. 

A. I saw Mr. Horsey, the man sitting 
there (the witness here pointed to the ac- 
cused, Stephen Horsey), at the Shoals, in 
May, 1863. He came to me and said they 
■were getting up a concern ; he did not state 
what it was, but it was something in de- 
fense of the countrj'^ — but he did not ex- 
actly tell me what it was at first, nor the 
name of it. I joined it, and they called it 
the Circle of Honor. Horsey said they 
wanted to find out what was the strength 
of the Democratic party at that time. 

Q. Where were you initiated? 

A. In an old house belonging to a man 
by the name of Gaddis, about a mile and a 
half from the Shoals. It was a vacant 
house at the time. 

Q. How many were there ? 

A. I could not say, exactly; I reckon 
about ten. 

Q. Who initiated you ? 

A. Mr. Horsey and Clayton initiated me. 

Q. Who presided at that meeting ? 

A. Mr. Horsey. 

Q. Did you take any obligation at that 
time? If so, state what it was. 

A. Yes, sir ; but I do not recollect what 
the oath was; it was pretty long. There was 
something about being torn into four parts 
before we would reveal the proceedings; 
one part was to be cast out at the east gate, 
one at the north gate, one at the south gate, 
and one at the west gate. 

Q. Did you learn what the gates meant ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was any business transacted at the 
meeting besides the initiation? 

A. None at all. 

Q. When was the next meeting you at- 
tended, and where]? 

A. I think the next meeting was across 
the river, at the Pinnacle, at a little vacant 
house. About the same persons were pres- 
ent as at the other meeting. Mr. Horsey 
presided at that meeting. 

Q. What was done at that meeting ? 

A. They took in two others. 

Q. When and where was the next meet- 
ing? 

A. In the latter part of the summer of 
1863, somewhere in the woods, about a 
couple of miles from the Shoals; it was back 
and east of Horsey's place. About eight or 
ten were at that meeting. 

Q. Were any steps taken, by the order, 
toward arming or drilling? 

A. Something was said about it; they 
wanted to give me an oflBce, but I would 
not accept it. They said we were to drill, 
and be ready; that we were to have our 
guns fixed in case any thing should happen 
or the soldiers should ever molest us, or 
any thing of that kind. 

Q. What was the purpose of this organi- 
sation. 



A. Its purpose came out toward the last, 
that we were to support Jeff Davis; that we 
were to have our guns fixed; that we did 
not know what hour we should be called on 
to have a general turn-out to support Jeff 
Davis, either North or South. That is what 
they said in the Knights of the Golden 
Circle ; but in the Circle of Honor they did 
not go so far. 

Q. You say this meeting in the woods 
was in the latter part of the summer ; when 
was the next? 

A. About the 27th or 28th of January, 
1864, when the order was changed to 
the Knights of the Golden Circle. 

Q. Who were the officers of that organi- 
zation ? 

A. The head man was John W. Stone. 

Q. Where did you meet? 

A. At Gaddis' house. 

Q. How many were present? 

A. Somewhere about thirty. 

Q. How did you happen to go to that 
meeting ? 

A. I was asked to go by Anderson Scar- 
lett. 

Q. Whom do you remember seeing at 
that meeting ? 

A. John W. Stone, John Teney, William 
Teney, Ike Teney, Stephen Horsey, the ac- 
cused, Golden Green, and some few others. 

Q. State, as nearly as you can, what was 
said and done at that meeting. 

A. I went there from the Shoals, and got 
into the meeting by giving the sign. It 
was a grip. After we were in, Horsey made 
a little speech, and said we were to have 
something different from the other order. 
He had a book, and said something about 
the K. G. C.'s and Knights of the Golden 
Circle. He said that before any man was 
taken in, two persons were to stand good for 
him, that he should not divulge any of the 
secrets. William Teney and Hiram Apples 
rose and stood for all. Some ten or fifteen 
were sworn in. The oath differed from the 
former oath, but I can not recollect it; 
there was something about supporting Jeft* 
Davis, North or South. In a speech that 
John W. Stone made, there was something 
said about putting Governor Morton out of 
the way. 

Q. Was Horsey present during this 
speech ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he make any speech ? 

A.. Not that I recollect. 

Q. Was any thing said at this meeting as 
to how these purposes were to be carried 
out? 

A. Yes, sir; they stated they were first 
to put Morton out of the way. A man 
who signed himself M. D. was to pay Gov- 
ernor Morton a visit, and he was to live 
but a short time afterward ; this visit was 
to be made about the 26th or 27th of 
March. There was to be a raid made ou 



TKEASON TKIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



95 



this place about five days from the 1st of 
April. 

Q. "Who were to make this raid ? 

A. The men of the lodge, and we were 
to arm ourselves to be ready. We were to 
take this place, wear out the soldiers, and 
release the prisoners. 

Q. What was to be done with the rebel 
prisoners ? 

A. Nothing that I recollect ; only that we 
were to go at the blue coats. 

Q. Was any thing said about the invasion 
of Ohio or Indiana by the rebels? 

A. They said that when we made the raid 
on this place, the members of the order in 
Illinois were to make a raid on Springfield, 
and those in Missouri on St. Louis. Wash- 
ington was to be attacked, and Forrest was 
to make a dash into Kentucky. He did 
make a raid a few days from the 5th of 
April. 

Q. Who developed these plans ? 

A. John W. Stone. 

Q. State, as far as you can, the signs, grips, 
and passwords of the Knights of the Golden 
Circle. 

A. If you wished to know if a man be- 
longed to the order, you gave him a chal- 
lenge, by placing the right foot in the hol- 
low of the left, then you folded your arms ; 
if he is a member and notices you, he does 
the same thing. Then each advance his 
right foot and touch toes and shake hands, 
running the fore-finger up the wrist, and 
giving a single shake. After you had 
shaken hands you were to say 0, he says A, 
and you answer K, and he pronounces Oak. 
He was then known as a brother. 

Q. What were the signs of the Circle of 
Honor ? 

A. To know if a man was a member of 
the order, you draw your hand across the 
upper lip ; he answers by doing the same 
thing with the left hand. You then step 
forward and give one single shake of the 
hand. If you doubt the fellow, you ask 
him if he saw that star ; if he was a mem- 
ber, he would reply by saying he saw that 
star in the East. You would ask what it 
represented, he would answer, " five points."' 
That proved to you that he was a full mem- 
ber. To recognize and test a person at a 
distance, the hands were clasped and 
raised above the head. He would answer 
by placing his hands upon his shoulders. 

Q. When was the last meeting you at- 
. tended of the Knights of the Golden Cir- 
cle? 

A. On the 26th or 27th of January. 

Q. Have they met since ? 

A. Not to my knowledge. 

Q. Why did you not continue with them? 

A. Because I thought they were getting 
along a littl-d too far for me, when they 
talked about helping the rebels; and as I 
had been in the army, and as what they 
avowed was against my principles, I came 



here in March, 1864, and reported to the 
Lieutenant Governor ? 

Q. What, if any thing, was said in refer- 
ence to acting with Morgan ? 

A. Something was said about Morgan's 
making a raid, but I do not recollect what. 

Q. Was any thing said about oftering him 
assistance in case the State was invaded ? 

A. We were to go to his assistance, as I 
understood it. 

Q. Who advocated going to the assistance 
of Morgan in case he invaded the State ? 

A. John W. Stone. 

Q. What has become of Stone ? 

A. I don't know. He had some difficul- 
ty with the men of the 17th Indiana, and 
some of the boys went after him when he 
made ofl", and the boys fired, and I under- 
stand he has since been seen, minus a 
finger. 

Q. Who were the most active members 
of the organization ? 

A. John W. Stone and William Clayton. 

Q. Was the order armed ? 

A. Not to my knowledge. Something 
was said about a box of pistols. Shirk- 
liff" and a man named Coffin got oft' at a 
station five miles from the Shoals, and 
Shirkliff had a box that was rather heavy. 
Coffin asked him what the box contained, 
and he said jewelry ; but Horsey and 
Shirklift' told mfe afterward, the box con- 
tained pistols, and laughed at Coffin for the 
way Shirkliff had fooled him. 

Q. Did he say what became of them? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Or who they were for ? 

A. No, sir. He said there would be pis- 
tols taken round the country, and any one 
could have them at cost and carriage. 

Q. Did he say whom you could get them 
from ? 

A. No, sir ; but I suppose he meant from 
himself, 

Q. Have you been in any lodge since 
that meeting? 

A. No, sir. I have had no connection 
with the order since January. 

Q. Who did you first reveal this order 
to? 

A. To my father, who was vexed at my 
having joined it. 1 then went to my uncle 
at Washington, and told him. I then came 
and had a talk with Captain Henly, of the 
17th Indiana, andgothim to write outan affi- 
davit. And the statement he made out 
was, I understood, sent to the Lieutenant 
Governor. 

Q. In case Governor Morton was assass- 
inated, who was to succeed him? 

A. H. H. Dodd was, according to what 
was said at the meeting. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I forgot to mention in my direct exami- 
nation that the signs of raising the hands 
above the head and the answer, were called 



96 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



the Morgan signs. If we joined the army 
and were captured, we were to give these 
signs, and then we should be better treated. 
This was told us by Horsey or Clayton at 
the time of giving us these signs. I did not 
understand that because they were given 
us, we were to join Morgan, but I under- 
stood they were for self-protection. We 
were not sworn in the Circle of Honor to 
help the South, nor were we pledged to do 
so. It was changed to the Knights of the 
Golden Circle in June, 1864, by John W. 
Stone. A man named Baker asked why 
the order did not come out at first as the 
Knights of the Golden Circle, and Horsey 
and Clayton said they wanted to find out 
how far the Democratic party was in favor 
of such an order, and if they came into it 
well, then they would change it into the 
Knights of the Golden Circle. By the two 
men standing good for us at the initiation into 
the Knights of the Golden Circle, I mean 
that they were to kill us and report us dead 
to the lodge, or bring us up for trial, in 
case we divulged the secrets. In the obli- 
gation that we took there was something 
said about having Jeff Davis for the next 
President, and voting for him; I can not 
remember how it was worded; we were 
sworn into the service of Jeff Davis, and 
were to support him whenever called upon. 
They said that all Jeff Davis asked, was 
.that the three States of Indiana, Illinois, 
land Missouri should join him, and he would 
I soon thrash out all the blue-coats, and then 
• they would go eastward, and clean out all 
the rest like a hurricane. I took the oath 
voluntarily ; I thought I would see what 
they did, and if it did not suit me I would 
report the order. The first time I divulged 
the order was to my father the next day, 
and to my uncle William Tranter, at Wash- 
ington, soon after. About the last of Feb- 
ruary I mentioned the matter to Captain 
Henley, here at Indianapolis. I came here 
on purpose, and found him at the Bates 
House, and got him to write out my state- 
ment for me. John W. Stone said there 
were 100,000 members in the Circle of Hon- 
or in Indiana, and about 60,000 in the 
Knights of the Golden Circle. When they 
changed to the Knights of the Golden Circle 
they dropped off a little. I took one degree 
in this order. John W. Stone said publicly 
that if we took the oath of the order, and were 
caught, we should not be hung, but treated 
as prisoners of war. I had a conversation 
with Horsey near the railroad, within two 
or three days after the last meeting I at- 
tended. We were talking about Stone get- 
ting me into a difficulty, and I said some of 
the soldiers would come and take us. Hor- 
sey said he did not think the soldiers could 
do it. He also said that Stone had stated 
what was false, and that there was no truth 
about paying Gov. Morton a visit. I said 
that a man who would preach such doctrine 



ought to be rallied, and I wanted Horsey 
to go with me and tell him of it, but he 
would not. Horsey might have said that 
Stone's doctrines were too secesh, but I do 
not recollect his saying so. If Mr. Horsey 
had gone over there with me, there would 
have been no Mr. Stone. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

Q. When was it that you had this conver- 
sation with Horsey? 

Answer. It was a few days after the meet- 
ing. 

Q. Who first induced you to join the 
order? 

A. Horsey was the first man; he initiated 
me. 

Q. Did he make any objection to your ta- 
king the Morgan sign ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he make any objection to your 
taking the oath ? 

A. No, sir; he took me into the organiza- 
tion and administered the oath to me. 

Stephen Tenet, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, was then introduced, and being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

State to the Court your name and resi- 
dence. 

Answer. Stephen Teney ; I live at Wash- 
ington, Daviess county, Indiana, where I 
have resided about a year. Previous to 
that I lived for seven years at Pleasant "Val- 
ley, Martin county. 

Q. What is your business ? 

A. I am a cooper by trade 

Q. Did you ever know Stephen Horsey ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When and where did you make his 
acquaintance ? 

A. At the Shoals. It is about five years 
since I first knew him. 

Q. Did you ever join any secret order 
called the Circle of Honor, Order of Amer- 
ican Knights, or Sons of Liberty? 

A. Yes, sir ; I joined the Circle of Honor. 

Q. Where, and when? 

A. In Columbia township, Martin county, 
near Connell School House, in the fall of 
1863, at Mr. Horsey's solicitation. 

Q. Is Mr. Horsey present in this room ? 
If so, point him out. 

[The witness here pointed to the ac- 
cused, Stephen Horsey.] 

Q. What, if any thing was done at that 
meeting? 

A. Fourteen members were taken in that 
night? 

Q. How many were present at that meet- 
ing? 

A. About twenty-fave. 

Q. Who presided? 

A. Mr. Horsey and a Mr. William Clay- 



TBEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



97 



ton were the presiding oflScers at that meet- 
ing. 

Q. Were you sworn in that night ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember what obligation you 
took? 

A. We were to be cut into four pieces if 
we told any thing. One part was to be 
cast out at the east gate, one at the north 
gate, one at the south gate, and one at the 
west gate, if we told any of the secrets ? 

Q. What were the secrets? 

A. We were not to tell who belonged to 
the order, nor any thing that was done at 
the meetings. 

Q. What did you learn to be the objects 
and purposes of the order ? 

A. From what I saw and learned, we 
were to assist the South, if called on. 

Q. Were any of the ways by which you 
could assist the South talked of? 

A. Yes, sir. If we were called on we 
were to rally, each in his township. 

Q. Under whom? 

A. I do not recollect, but we were to rally 
in each township to assist the rebels if they 
came through. 

Q. With arms or how ? 

A. They did not say. They also said if 
we did not rally, and stick up one for an- 
other, that the Democratic party would be 
torn down. 

Q. What had that to do with giving as- 
sistance to the rebels ? 

A. I do not know; that is the way Horsey 
and Clayton talked to us that night. Hor- 
sey told us about it first, and then Clay- 
ton. 

Q. Did Horsey say any thing about oppos- 
ing the Government? 

A. He told us we were to hold ourselves 
in readiness at any time to be called out. 

Q. State whether or not there was any 
arming or drilling in this order ? 

A. We drilled a few times in the town- 
ship ; we just marched. 

Q. Do you know any thing about an at- 
tempt to arm the order ? 

A. I was told by one of my brothers, Wil- 
liam Teney, who was a member of the or- 
der, that they were getting arms all the 
time. This was after I removed, and went 
back, that he told me this. The order 
was then called the Knights of the Golden 
Circle. 

Q. Who was the chief of that order ? 

A. I do not know. I went there once, 
and they told me the oath, but I would not 
take it. 

Q. What did your brother tell you about 
arms ? 

A. He said that they had three hundred 
pistols in that county ; and that Baker, of 
Dover Hill, went to Cincinnati and got 
some, and some he got from Philadelphia. 

Q. Had you any talk with Horsey ? 

A. Not about the arms. 

7 



Q. When was the last talk you had with 
Horsey ? 

A. It must have been some four or five 
months since. He told me they were get- 
ting along finely with their order. 

Q. What order did he refer to ? 

A. I suppose he meant the Golden Cir- 
cle. 

Q. Did you ever hear Horsey make any 
other speeches ? 

A. No, sir. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I am in the army now, and have been 
since the draft. No inducements have 
been held out to me to testify in this case, 
but McDonald, who is a Government de- 
tective, told me if I told all I knew, he would 
do what he could for me, and relieve me 
from the draft. Nothing was said in the 
obligation about supporting the Constitu- 
tion of the United States, or the Constitu- 
tion of the State of Indiana. Mr. Horsey 
said we were to support the South ; he 
swore us to support Jeff" Davis, North or 
South. That was a part of the oath, and we 
were to suifer ourselves to be torn into 
four pieces if we did not support Jeff" Davis 
North or South. My brother told me this 
last summer that he was a member of the 
Knights of the Golden Circle. During the 
summer, when I visited my brother, I went 
with him to the Knights of the Golden 
Circle, and they wanted me to take the 
oath, but I would not. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

Has any officer of the Government held 
out any inducement to you that you should 
receive any benefit for testifying in this 
case? 

A. No, sir; only what that detective said; 
he promised to do all he could for me. 

Q. Have you ever asked any officer of 
the Government to relieve you ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you expect to be relieved from the 
draft? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you testify from any such induce- 
ment? 

A. No, sir; I think more of my oath than 
that. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Friday, October 28, 1864, at 9 o'clock, 
A. M. 

Court Koom, Indianapoiis, Indiana, ) 
October 28, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment 

All the members present Also, the Judge 
Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved, 

J. J.J BiNGHAM , a witness for Government, 
was then introduced, and being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 



98 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Question by the Judge Advocate: 

State your name, place of residence, and 
business? 

Answer. Joseph J. Bingham; I reside in 
the city of Indianapolis, and am editor of 
the Daily and Weekly Indiana 8tate Sentinel. 

Q. BBow long have you resided in Indian- 
apolis ? 

A. Since August, 1856. 

Q. "Where did you reside previous to 
that? 

A. At Lafayette, in this State. 

Q. IIow long have you published the In- 
diana State Sentinel? 

A. Since the 26th of August, 1856. 

Q. Did you ever join an order called the 
American Knights, or Sons of Liberty? 

A. I joined an order which was called the 
American Knights, in the latter part of 
October or the beginning of November, 
1863. 

Q. Where? 

A. In this city, in the Military Hall, on 
Washington street, between Meridian and 
Pennsylvania. 

Q. Who was in possession of the Hall? 

A. It was leased by the Democratic Club 
of this city. 

Q. Was it under their control ? 

A. It is my impression that it was under 
their control at the time. 

Q. What was the first meeting of the 
American Knights that you attended? 

A. The first meeting, if you can call it 
such, was my initiation; there were very 
few present. 

Q. M'^ho were present? 

A. Mr. Dodd, Mr. Harrison, a man by the 
name of Jacobs, Dr. Johnson, and I think 
a person of the name of Vandegrifi^ 

Q. Was Mr. Ristine or Hord there? 

A. Not at that time. 

Q. AVhat took place at that meeting ? 

A. It was only an informal initiation ; we 
did not go through all the ceremonies, the 
greater part was omitted. 

Q. State to the Court how you came to 
join the order, and at whose solicitation you 
joined? 

A. In the latter part of August, or the first 
of September, I was introduced by Mr. Dodd 
to a man by the name of P. C. Wright. He 
brought him to my oflSce and left him there; 
said he wanted to have a talk with me. 
Mr. Wright went on to state his business; 
gave me a little history of himself; he stated 
that he was a lawyer in business in New 
Orleans, at the breaking out of this rebel- 
lion; that he was forced to leave on account 
of his Union sentiments ; that he went to St. 
Louis, and practiced alternately between 
St Louis and New Orleans — in St. Louis in 
the summer, and New Orleans in the win- 
ter; he said he was a lawyer in the celebrated 
Gaines case, and that in examining the 
papers of General Gaines, he came across 
what purported to be a secret organization 



that existed during the Revolutionary War. 
He told me that General Lee was President 
of the Association, as appeared from the 
papers; that Madison, Jefferson, and I be- 
lieve Washington, had belonged to it; that 
it had exerted a very powerful agency in 
maintaining the contest during the war, and 
establishing our present form of govern- 
ment; that he thought he would establish 
a similar order. He told me that the prin- 
ciples of the oi'der were the same as existed 
during the Revolution; that the ritual and 
obligation were nearly the same; that the 
papers were not perfect, but the omissions 
were supplied; and that he came to this 
State for the purpose of extending the order 
here. He said it existed in Missouri, Illinois, 
and even in the Central American States; it 
was not confined to the United States, but 
was to extend over all the world, not limited 
by any geographical divisions. He urged 
me to join, and take part in it, and be one 
of the persons to establish the order here. 
I said 1 was opposed to all secret political 
organizations — that I never saw any good 
come from them — and declined. He visited 
the prominent Democrats of the city, and 
used the same arguments, but most of them 
declined. I do not know whether Mr. 
Dodd was a member of the order at that 
time; I understood he intended to be. Mr. 
Dodd is a gentleman very fond of excite- 
ment ; he has a natural taste for secret asso- 
ciations. He was a prominent and one of 
the most active members of the Know 
Nothing order; and he was head and front 
of the Sons of Malta, in this city; his taste 
runs that way. I have known Mr. Dodd 
for many years; for three or four years I 
have had business relations with him that 
threw him constantly in contact with me. 
After Wright left, Dodd urged me to join 
the association. I declined at first. Finally 
he told me what its objects were; that it 
was to be a permanent organization; polit- 
ical, but not partisan ; that it was to sym- 
pathize with the principles of the Demo- 
cratic party. He said that the object was 
to educate the people in the old fashioned 
republican doctrines, the same as those en- 
tertained by Madison and Jefferson; that 
it was designed to establish a paper 
here, to be the organ and advocate of its 
principles, and that it was intended to have 
a large university near the city, to educate 
young men in what he termed correct polit- 
ical doctrines; and that the organization 
was to be permanent, like the Odd Fellows 
or Masons. 

When the proposition of the paper was 
started, he said he wanted to advise with 
me about many matters which he could not 
unless 1 was a member of the organization, 
and that he could not even tell me the 
names of the members of the order; that 
was one of the obligations of secrecy; but 
if I would join, he would not put me through 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



99 



the regular ceremonies, but would initiate 
me informally, and if I did not like it, as I 
joined voluntarily, so I could leave it when- 
ever I pleased. I thought I saw in this the 
seeds of discord, so far as the Democratic 
party was concerned. Being a party man, 
X thought the only way to secure success 
was by the uniting of the different elements 
in opposition to the Administration. With 
that view of the case 1 joined at the time 
I named. Dodd informed me that he had 
appointed me a delegate to the State Coun- 
cil, which met in November, 1863. I at- 
tended; took what they called a Council 
degree; but what it is I can not now tell, I 
paid so little attention to it The meeting 
was held in the Military Hall. Dodd pre- 
sided at the meeting, and Mr. Harrison was 
Secretary. I do not recollect what other 
oflficers were there. 1 saw Mr. VandegriiF 
at the meeting; and I think Dr. Athon, 
Mr. Ristine, and Mr. Milligan, the accused, 
were present. A gentleman named Cush- 
man, from thenorthern partof the State, was 
present. 

Q. Were any others of the accused pres- 
ent? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What business was done at that meet- 
ing? 

A. The Council was opened in due form; 
those that had not taken the Council de- 
gree were initiated, and then various com- 
mittees were appointed. I found myself 
placed as Chairman of the Committee on 
Literature. 

Q. What other committees were ap- 
pointed? 

A. I do not recollect. 

Q. Was a military committee appointed? 

A. I do not recollect. 

Q. Were any appointments made by 
Dodd? 

A. Not in my hearing. 

Q. At what time of day was the meeting 
held? 

A. It convened at 10 o'clock in the morn- 
ing. 

Q. How long did it last ? 

A. I was there about an hour, but I un- 
derstood it lasted till evening. 

Q. Why did you not remain ? 

A. I withdrew to write my report. I wrote 
a brief report, advising, as far as a paper 
was concerned, that nothing be done until 
means were raised to support it a year ; and 
I recommended the indefinite postponement 
of the university scheme until the next 
meeting of the Council. I returned then, 
and some other business was going on, but 
I do not recollect what. I handed my re- 
port to the committee, in which was a Dr. 
Bryant. 1 told Cushman that my engage- 
ments were such that I could not remain, 
and he would oblige me if, when the report 
was called, he would read it. 

Q. Did you learn from any members 



present about the appointment of mtyor 
generals ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever hear of any military ap- 
pointments being made? 

A. No, sir. I did not know that the or- 
ganization embraced any thing of a military 
nature till the exposure of the Sons of Lib- 
erty. 

Q. You will please proceed with your nar- 
ration? 

A. I never attended what is called the 
meeting of the temple. On the 16th of Feb- 
ruary another State Council was held. Mr. 
Dodd informed me that by virtiie of my ap- 
pointment, I had a right to attend. 1 went 
in on the morning of the 16th. I had been to 
the post office, and stopped on my way to 
my own office, for a few minutes. I had 
nothing to do with the meeting, and did 
not feel much interest in the matter. 1 
was in again for a little while in the after- 
noon, when I went to the post office a sec- 
ond time. When I went in there was a 
gentleman of this city making a speech. 
Major Conklin, and this was the first time I 
recollect hearing about any military appoint- 
ments. I suppose he had been called on for 
a report of what he had done, for the drift 
of his speech — what I heard of it — was, that 
he had not drilled any body, and had not 
any body to drill. That is all my recollec- 
tion of that meeting. 

Q. How did he come to report that fact? 

A. I suppose he had been called upon for 
a report; that was what I gathered from 
the nature of his speech ; and that was the 
first idea I had of its being a military organ- 
ization. I never read the rituai, or the con- 
stitution, or by-laws. I think Mr. Heffren 
was present at that meeting. Mr. Ueffi-en is 
an old friend of mine, and came to my office 
to see me several times. At one of those inter- 
views we exchanged our opinions as to this 
association. 1 told him that 1 thought no 
good would come of it. Mr. Heffren coincided 
with my views, and said he believed it was 
a humbug. These are the only meetings I 
attended. I did not wish to belong to the 
organization. I paid my fees, and asked 
Mr. Dodd if any formal withdrawal was 
necessary; he said that my joining was vol- 
untary, and I might withdraw when 1 liked. 
I did not consider myself a member of the 
organization since that time, and have not 
been a member, though my having been in 
the order gives me the confidence of the 
members, and I have learned many things 
that I otherwise should not have known. 

Q. Did you hear the address of Dodd at 
the meeting of the 16th or 17th of Feb- 
ruary ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. How long were you present? 

A. I was not there over twenty or thirty 
minutes. I heard afterward that he had 
delivered an address, but I never read it 



100 



TREASON TRIALS AT IXDIANAPOLIS. 



till I saw it in the Journal of the 30th of 
July. 

Q. Who was present at that meeting ? 

A. Colonel Bowles, the accused, Dr. Bry- 
ant, Mr. Blake, of Terre Haute, Mr. Cush- 
man and 'Squire McBride, of Evansville. 
There must have been some thirty or forty 
there, but few that I was acquainted with. 

Q. Was Mr. Milligan or Mr. Humphreys 
present '! 

A. Not to my knowledge. I did not see 
them there. Mr. Heflren was present. 

Q. Did you learn what business was trans- 
acted at that meeting ? 

A. I asked the question after the adjourn- 
ment of the meeting, and was told nothing 
particular had been done 

Q. Did you learn who had been appoint- 
ed to the Supreme Council ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know who composed the Com- 
mittee of Thirteen? 

A. No, sir. The Committee of Thirteen, 
in my opinion, was a myth. The next thing 
that came up, in connection with the order, 
was this : Dr. Bowles, Mr. Dodd, Judge Bul- 
litt, and Barrett were at my business office. 

I met them on the platform as I was going 
down from my room; I was introduced 
to them, and supposed they were all 
members of the order, tliough nothing was 
said about it; I supposed so from their as- 
sociation. Judge Bullitt I had known pre- 
viously, I think fifteen years ago; he had 
done me a great kindness; we renewed 
our acquaintance, and he asked me to call 
and see him at the Palmer House; said he 
had some fine Kentucky whisky, and in- 
vited me to take a drink. About half past 

II I thought I would go to my dinner 
early and stop in and see him. I knew 
where the room was, it was No. 28 ; I went 
right up stairs and knocked at the door. 
He said, "Come in," and I opened the 
door. The first man I saw was a person of 
the name of Coffin. I did not know then 
what his occupation was, but from his asso- 
ciations I thought he was a Republican, 
and I thought it was queer company ibr 
Democrats. I walked up and shook hands 
with him; he whispered to me, "I've have 
caught you at last." I thought that was 
very strange, very singular; I walked around 
the room, and mentioned to one of the 
gentlemen that it was a singular company. 
We passed the salutations of the day, and 
I then said to Bullitt, "If you have any 
good whisky, bring it out." He brought it 
out, and we had a drink. I asked Coffin 
if he was going to dinner; he said he was, 
and we walked together. As we walked 
out, I asked an explanation of the remark 
he had made to me, "I've caught you at 
last." He told me a story not necessary to be 
repeated here, and applied it to me; said 
that was all he meant. A few days after- 
ward I met Joseph E. McDonald, on Wash- 



ington street. I told him the circumstance, 
and he remarked to me, "Don't you know 
who this Coffin is?" "He is a United States 
Detective; he is in the employ of the Gov- 
ernment, and has been for two yeai's." I 
remarked to him that it was a singular se- 
cret society, the members of which should 
sit in council with a United States Detec 
tive. 

Q. Did you at that time unfold to Mr. 
McDonald your association with that or- 
der? 

A. No, sir; I do not think I told him till 
sometime subsequent. 

Q. What was done by these gentlemen? 

A. They never told me their business ; 
and to this day I do not know what they 
met together for. 

Q. You say that you met McDonald, and 
that you remarked to him that it was a sin- 
gular secret association that should have a 
United States Detective in it; how did you 
come to tell him that, if you did not make 
known to him that you were a member of 
the order? 

A. We had talked upon the subject fre- 
quently ; I do not know if he knew wheth- 
er I was a member or not. 

Q. Did you ever give him to understand 
that you were a member? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. From your conversation do you know 
whether he was aware that you were a mem- 
ber of the order ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. When was this conversation with Mr. 
McDonald? 

A. The interview occurred about the 
middle of May, and it was, I think, within 
a week afterward, that I had this conversa- 
tion with McDonald. 

Q. Where were you first introduced to 
Mr. Stidger — in your office ? 

A. I first saw him there. Every Sunday 
morning, about 9 o'clock, a number of 
political friends met in my office to 
hear the telegrams read. One Sunday 
morning, about the 1st of June, I was 
coming down to my office, and I met Dodd 
and Stidger. Dodd introduced him to me, 
and I recollected the man, though not his 
name; he said he was the Private Secre- 
tary of Judge Bulhtt ; and either at that 
interview or within a short time, a day or 
two, Dodd or Stidger made this remark, 
that this man Coffin had compromised 
Judge Bullitt, or that Judge Bullitt thought 
he had, I don't recollect which. The next 
meeting of the order here was held in 
June, but I know nothing of its proceed- 
ings, as I was not present. That brings U9 
along to about the first of August. In the 
mean time 1 had seen Colonel Bowles once; 
he came to my office one evening ; said ho 
wanted to talk with me about matters gen- 
erally ; and he asked me if I thought thir 
man Coffin was a detective; he had hf« 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



101 



doubts about it I told Iiim there was no 
doubt about it. 

Q. From whom did you have it? 

A. Mr. McDonald. Another circumstance 
it may be well to relate; it shows the per- 
fect system of espionage here. 

[The Judge Advocate remarked that it 
was unnecessary to state that here.] 

I do not recollect any thing special oc- 
curring until the 2d or 3d of August. 
About that time, one morning Mr. Dodd 
came into my room and said, "I want to 
have a talk with you." He said he wanted 
to tell me something; "but," said he, "you 
must give me your word of honor that what 
I say to you, you will not reveal to any living 
being." Not knowing what it was, I said, 
^'Certainly." He went on to say it had 
been determined at a meeting, or Council, 
I do not recollect which, I think he said at 
a Council of Sixteen ; I believe he said some- 
thing about its being composed of four 
from Indiana, four from Illinois, four from 
Kentucky, and four from Missouri; I do 
not think any names were mentioned but 
Judge Bullitt and Mr. Bowles ; he said that 
at the Council, a resolution had been deter- 
mined upon, and he went on to explain it. 
He said that ari'angements had been made to 
release the prisoners on Johnson's Island ; 
at Camp Chase, near Columbus, Ohio ; at 
Camp Morton, and also at Camp Douglas, 
and that the prisoners at Camp Douglas, 
after their release, were to go over and re- 
lease those at Rock Island. At the same 
time there was to be an uprising at Louis- 
ville, at which the Government stores, etc., 
were to be seized. 

Q. An uprising of what and who ? 

A. He did not state what or who; he 
said an " uprising." I looked at the man 
in astonishment. I thought it was a wild 
dream; I could not believe it possible. 
I studied a moment, and said, "Mr. Dodd, 
do you know what you are going to under- 
take ? Do you know the position of mili- 
tary atfairs here at this post ? Do you 
think you can accomplish this scheme with 
any number of unarmed and undisciplined 
men you can bring here ?" Another thing he 
remarked to me was that this revolution 
was going to take place at several points on 
the 16 th of August, and that I was the 
only person he communicated this to in 
the city. I asked " how is this revolution 
to take place, and nobody know any thing 
about it?" As to the way in which it was 
to be done here, and at Louisville, he made 
a suggestion to me, as I was Chairman of 
the Democratic State Central Committee, 
which was that I should call a mass meet- 
. ing of the Democracy on the IGtlj of August. 
I said we had had experience enough of 
Democratic mass meetings, and there would 
be no excuse or apology for calling such a 
meeting here. I asked him what excuse 
he could give for calling the meeting. He 



said to take some expression against the 
draft, and to give some instructions to the 
delegates who attended the Chicago Con- 
vention, which was to be held on the 29th 
of Augyist. I told him I could consenTTb 
nothiiig of the kind, and would be a party 
to no such scheme. W. H. Talbot, Chair- 
man of the Democratic Central Congres- 
sional District, had gone to New York, and 
he left me to act in his absence. Dodd 
knew this, and on my declining to call a 
meeting, as chairman of the Democratic 
State Central Committee, he wanted me to 
call a District mass meeting to nominate a 
candidate for this Congressional District. 
I told him I would not. Dodd then made 
application to others, also to McDonald to 
urge him to induce me to call a mass meet- 
ing, but I declined to do it. I then began 
to think seriously about the matter, and to 
reflect what was best to be done. I had 
been intrusted with an important secret, 
and it was of such a nature that 1 thought 
I ought not to keep it. I then determined 
to investigate the matter. I first called on 
Mr. Ristine, and I put leading questions to 
him to find out whether or not he knew 
of any such project, as that which had been 
communicated to me by Mr. Dodd, and I 
felt satisfied that he did not. I then called 
upon Mr. Athon, and in the same way I 
asked him leading questions to find out 
what he knew about the matter, and I felt 
satisfied he knew nothing about it. I 
spoke to others, to Mr. Hord among the 
rest. I went to bed and slept over it 

In the morning I went to see Mr. J. E. 
McDonald. I told him I had secret infor- 
mation that I wished to consult him about; 
that it was a matter involving us all, and 
that some action had to be taken immedi- 
ately. He said he was willing to listen to 
all I had to say. This was on the night of 
the 4th of August I told Mr. McDonald 
all that Dodd had told me, and the circum- 
stances under which he had told it, and 
that I had come to advise with him as to 
what was my duty in the matter. We 
talked the matter over sometime, and 
finally came to the conclusion that we 
would sleep over it, but that the thing 
must be stopped at all hazards. I left him 
at 9 o'clock, and went to my office. As I 
walked down Washington street I saw a 
gentleman coming up rapidly, and 1 stopped 
him : " Halloo ! Kerr, what has brought you 
here ?" I said. He seemed very much exci- 
ted. "Do you know any thing?" he said; and 
I said, "Do you know anything?'" "Yes," 
he replied. "What is it?" said I. He then 
said, "The devil's to pay in our section of 
the State; the people of Washington, Har- 
rison and Floyd counties, and that neigh- 
borhood, had got the idea that a revolution 
was imjiending; the farmers were fright- 
ened, and were selling their hay in the 
fields and their wheat in the stacks, and all 



102 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



the property that could be was being con- 
verted into greenbacks." 

Q. What Kerr was that? 

A. Michael C. Kerr. "Is that all you 
know?" I said. "No," said he. Then he 
went on and represented to me just what 
Dodd had before told me. He went over the 
whole schenie,ju6t as Dodd had revealed it. 
As we walked along, he turned around once 
or twice to see if any detectives were follow- 
ing us. I didn't let him know that I knew 
anything about the matter. I said, "This is a 
most important matter, and I insist that you 
go up to Mr. McDonald's with me, and tell 
him what you have told me." We got him 
up, and I said to him, "Kerr has got some 
important information, and I want him 
to tell you the same story that he has told 
me." 

Q. Did you, previous to that time, or at 
that time, as a matter of safety to yourself, 
state to McDonald your whole connection 
with the matter? 

A. 1 think he understood that I was a 
member of the order. 

Q. Did you give him the whole history of 
the matter ? 

A. He undei'stood I was a member of the 
order. In this conversation with Mr. Kerr, 
he involved Dr. Athon in the scheme. I 
think, also, he told me that Governor Mor- 
ton was to be captured or taken prisoner, 
and that Dr. Athon was to be Provisional 
Governor, and that was to be part of the 
scheme. McDonald said we would all meet 
in the morning, as had been agreed upon. 
Coming out, I said that I could not rest 
under the suspicion that Dr. Athon knew 
any thing of the scheme. I did not think 
that Vie did; and I said that although it 
was after 12 o'clock, I would go to his 
house. We went and called him up. He 
came down, and I told him, that although 
it was such a late hour, yet as Mr. Kerr 
had come with such important information 
he ought to know it that night. He agreed 
to meet with us the next morning at Mc- 
Donald's office. Coming out, I asked what 
he thought of Dr. Athon ? He said, " He is an 
innocent man. He knows nothing about 
this scheme." Athon Avould scarcely be- 
lieve that such a scheme was entertained. 
I think he said: "It's all gas; such a 
scheme can not be entertained by sensible 
men." 

The next day we went about 8 or 9 
o'clock to McDonald's office. I had invite<l 
in all the prominent Democrats I could see. 
Judge Khoads was present ; McDonald was 
present; William Henderson, of this city; 
Mr. Hord, Aquilla Jones, Samuel H. Bus- 
kirk, Mr. Ristine, I think. Dr. Yeakle, and 
Colonel Caldwell, of Lafayette, and there 
may have been others. Mr. Kerr then told 
the story to those present. Then we had a 
couBultation about the matter, and came to 
the conclusion that the matter must be 



stopped right then. After awhile Dodd 
and John C. Walker came in. 

Q. Was Dodd sent for, or did he come of 
his own volition ? 

A. I think he was told that a meeting 
was to be held there that morning for con- 
sultation. Walker had arrived from New 
York that morning. This meeting occur- 
red on Friday, the 5th of August. Mr. 
Kerr made a speech. He spoke about this 
excitement — this revolutionary scheme — 
and that he came up on purpose to put a stop 
to the thing. I think he said that it was our 
duty to stop it, and I coincided ; and if it 
could not be stopped in any other way, it 
was our duty to inform the authorities. 
Coloner Walker and Dodd did not acknowl- 
edge at that interview that any such 
scheme was entertained. They both spoke, 
and very earnestly, about the state of pub- 
lic affairs, and they used about these argu- 
ments : That the Government could not be 
restored again under the old state of things 
without a forcible revolution. That an ap- 
peal to the ballot-box was all folly ; that the 
people were prepared for revolution; that 
they would not submit to the draft; and 
that it was better to direct the revolution 
than to have revolution direct us. That 
was about what they said. Before we left 
there, these gentlemen agreed that this 
whole matter should be stopped, and we 
were satisfied from the pledges they gave 
us, that the thing would be stopped. But 
how they intended to do it, I do not know ; I 
understood they would send messengers 
to those various points, and state that that 
was their determination. Tht^ assured us 
that we need have no further apprehen- 
sions about the matter, and we rested con- 
tent with that. 

I was satisfied at that time — and the 
question was asked me the other day why I 
did not inform the authorities, but I was 
satisfied that tlie authorities knew as much 
as I did, and from this one circumstance 
among others. The signal of the uprising 
at Louisville, was to be the notice of a bar- 
becue to take place in the neighborhood of 
Louisville. It was understood that the up- 
rising was to take place on the day aii- 
noiniced for that barbecue. Mr. Kerr in- 
formed us that night, in our interview with 
McDonald, that Judge Bullitt had that day 
or the day previous been arrested. Also 
that many of the promine)it members of 
the order and others, had fled the State, and 
the reason was the publication of that bar- 
becue. A good many of them had come up 
on the same train with him, and others had 
left the day before. They had gone to New 
York and Canada. I was satisfied from that 
fact that the authorities knew as nuicli 
about the matter as 1 did. And this was 
confirmed a day or two afterward by a re- 
mark that fell from General Carrington. He 
spoke of this thing to Mr. McDonald, and 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



103 



Mr. McDonald and myself were both satis- 
fied that the authorities were fully informed, 
and the circumstances seem to have shown 
that they were. They were informed of it 
before I was. Stidger was informed of it 
on the 29th of July, three or four days be- 
fore it was communicated to me, so 
that General Carrington and the author- 
ities must have known of it on the night of 
the 29th of July. We had then called the 
Democratic State Central Committee to 
meet on the 17th of August, to fill vacan- 
cies on the State ticket, and to report, etc 
I regarded this matter as most important 
in its eftects upon the Democratic party, 
and that was another reason why I did not 
wish to say any thing about it, for if this 
thing had been made public, it would injure 
us in the coming election; the charge would 
be made that the Democratic party was a 
revolutionary party, and we would have 
been saddled with the sins of these men. 
Another thing, it was a matter of personal 
honor. I received this information from 
those gentlemen under peculiar circum- 
stances, and after I found the thing was 
stopped, I did not feel it incumbent on 
me to inform the authorities. I advised 
the gentlemen to leave before they should be 
arrested. Dodd was here two weeks after, 
and Walker was here from the 5th to the 
15th of August without being arrested. My 
conversation at the time the authorities 
knew about it — for I had every reason to 
believe it — made me come to this conclu- 
sion. I told them as a friend, that if they 
remained here they would be arrested. They 
thought so and left. 

Q. At this meeting, at which Mr. McDon- 
ald and others were present, did Mr. Dodd 
confess that his scheme was true? 

A. No, sir; but rather denied it. He 
neither confessed nor denied it, but said 
that revolution was necessary. 

Q. Was it charged upon him by Mr. Kerr 
that it was true ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And did he refuse to acknowledge the 
fact ? 
■ A. He refused to deny or acknowledge it. 

Q. Why did you not make known to 
I- />, those persons who did not know it, that it 
was true? 

A. We did, sir. All present understood 
it thoroughly. We conversed an hour or 
two before these gentlemen came in. 

We had a meeting of the Central Com- 
mittee on the 12th of August. I stated in 
the notice sent out on the 6th of August, 
that matters of grave importance demanded 
a large attendance, and it was hoped that 
all the Committee would attend, and we in- 
vited other prominent men in the State. 
We had quite a large meeting. We filled 
up the vacancies on the State ticket, and 
then this matter came up for discussion. Mr. 
Kerr was present, and at my request he laid 



this whole affair before the members of the 
Committee, and the same resolution came 
up there we had in our previous consulta- 
tion, that, if the thing had not been stopped, 
it must be now. We had to be satisfied on' 
that point. 

Colonel Walker came to that meeting. 
We had a two-days meeting — the 12th and 
the 13th. And he assured the Committee 
that it was stopped, that nothing of the 
kind should take place. 

Q. Was it previous to, or after this meet- 
ing of the Council of Sixteen at Chicago, 
that you met Mr. Walker here, and had a 
conversation with him, in reference to any 
rebel officers going to Hlinois, to take charge 
of the rebel prisoners ? 

A. I saw Mr. Walker previously, once or 
twice, while he was here. I met him on 
the street, and he complained that I had 
not seen him. He was sleeping at Colonel 
Rose's room, in this building, at the time. 
Colonel Rose was absent at the time. He 
is a brother-in-law of Colonel Rose. This 
was on the morning of the 11th. He went 
to the Bates House, and said he regretted 
to have to go to the Bates House, it was a 
bad place to stop at. I asked him why he 
was going. He said he had to meet these 
gentlemen by appointment. I understood 
him to say they were rebel ofiacers. They 
would be there that day, and unless he was 
there, they would not know where to find 
him. He said they were on their way to 
Chicago to take charge of the rebel prison- 
ers when they were released from Camp 
Douglas. It was necessary that he should 
see them, to tell them that the whole 
scheme was stopped. He met me afterward, 
and said he had seen them, and they had 
gone on and stopped all operations at that 
time, for the release of the prisoners. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the accused: 

To what extent was this scheme of revo- 
lution known and entertained in this order, 
and out of it, as far as you know ? 

A. All that I know is that it was commu- 
nicated to me under those circumstances, 
and I know nothing further than those to 
whom I communicated it in this city and 
those who came from a distance. 

Q. To what extent did Dodd state that he 
had communicated the matter ? 

A. He stated to me that I was the only 
person to whom he had communicated it. 
That was about the 2d or 3d of August. 

Q. Did Mr. Kerr get his information from 
the same source? 

A. No, sir. I do not know where he got it. 

Q. Do you say this Council of Sixteen had 
resolved upon this revolutionary scheme 
when it convened at Chicago ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long before that? 

A. I don't think he told me, when I saw 



104 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



him here from Chicago or New York; he 
got back about the 29th of July. 

Q. Did you not know, from other sources, 

and through other medium, that, so far 

' from Mr. Dodd's statement being true, the 

proposition had actually been voted down 

in that Council? 

A. Yes, sir. I heard that. 

Q. Did you hear it from the members of 
the order? 

A. I heard it, but it did not come directly 
from a member of the order. 

Q. Did you learn from Dodd, that Bowles 
was a member of that Council? 

A. That is what I understood. 

Q. Did you understand from Bowles, as a 
member of the Council, that the proposition 
for revolution had been voted down? 

A. Not directly. 

Q. Who were the members of that Coun- 
cil? Was either of the accused — Heftren, 
Horsey, Milligan,or Humphreys a member? 

A. I did not understand that either of 
them was. 

Q. You say that it was not until a very 
late period of your connection with the or- 
der, that you got any knowledge of its mili- 
tary feature. Did it, either with or without 
its military feature, contemplate in its 
teachings, as you got them in the order, or 
in the ritual, or any of its written or un- 
written works, any such revolutionary 
scheme as the purpose and object of the 
order ? 

A. I did not so understand it; I never 
read the Constitution or Ritual until long 
after I joined; not until the 30th of July. 

Q. What was the purpose of the organiza- 
tion as you understood it ? 

A. Purely political. That was my under- 
standing of it at the time I joined it. 

Q. This conflict of the Government, then, 
that was concocted by these men, you say 
was not within the scope or contemplation 
of the order? 

A. Nothing was ever mentioned in the 
order, or by any member of the order, until 
it was communicated by Dodd to me. 

Q. Do you know any thing about the Com- 
mittee of Thirteen ? 

A. I think it* was some time in August. 
On the Saturday that these arms were dis- 
covered, a young man came to my house 
after supper, and brought me a communica- 
tion from Dodd and Walker. I think they 
were in Chicago. They inclosed an address 
from what was called a Committee of Thir- 
teen, and requested me to publish it in the 
Sentinel; and if 1 did not publish it, they 
wanted to have it printed in Dodd's ofiBce. 
I told him 1 had not time to look at it, but 
if he would come in on Surjday morning, I 
would let him know. I declined to pub- 
lish it, and I told him that as I had an in- 
terest in Dodd's establishment, it could 
not be published there. I inclosed the 
communication back to Mr. Walker. 



Q. You say, do you not, that Walker said 
he wrote the address, and was authorized to 
use Dodd's name as chairman of the Com- 
mittee of Thirteen? 

A. I understand there was no such com- 
mittee. 

Q. Had you any evidence that Walker 
signed the communication.? 

A. Yes, sir. It was in his handwriting. 
Dodd also wrote to the same efiect from 
Chicago. 

Q. Had you any more than one conversa- 
tion with Heffren? 

A. Yes, sir. Heflfren came to my office 
several times; the night before and the 
night after the meeting on the 16th and 
17 th of February. 

Q. Was it on that occasion you said you 
would have nothing to do with the oi'der? 

A. Yes, sir; and Heffi^en said he con- 
sidered it a humbug. 

Q. Did he express any opinion about 
abandoning it ? 

A. Yes, sir. I so understood him. He 
coincided with my opinion and would do as 
I had done. 

Q. Did you have any information of Mr. 
Heffren' s meeting with the organization 
after that ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. You stated, did you not, that Mr. Milli- 
gan was present at the State Council in No- 
vember ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was that the only time you met him 
at the State Council ? 

A. I met him only that time, and that 
was the only knowledge I had of his con- 
nection with the order. 

Q. Have you not stated that nothing was 
discussed in the order but pure politics, 
education and literature ? 

A. That was all that was discussed in my 
hearing. There may have been other mat- 
ters that 1 did not hear. 

Q. What was the date of the time when 
you expressed your determination not to 
have any more to do with the institu- 
tion? 

A. It was after the February meeting. 

Q. Did you not after that time maintain 
your previous intimacy with members or 
persons belonging to the organization? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. From October until the 15th of Au- 
gust, when Dodd revealed to you the pur- 
pose to inaugurate a revolution, did you 
hear, in or out of the order, of any purpose 
to inaugurate a revolution by the order 
itself? 

A. Nothing of the kind. 

Q. Then what was the organization? Was 
it not purely political ? 

A. That was my understanding. 

Q. Then I will ask you to state whether 
this conspiracy that Dodd revealed to you 
was not a conspiracy of Dodd, Walker and 



TREASON TRIALS AT mDIANAPOLIS. 



105 



one or two others, and not a conspiracy by 
the order ? 

A. That was my understanding, sir. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate : 

Do you say that was your understand- 
ing ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was it not your understanding that 
the leaders of the order were to use the or- 
der to accomplish this revolution? What 
position did Dodd hold in the command of 
the order ? 

A. He was Grand Commander. 

Q. Had he not, according to the Consti- 
tution and Ritual, the power to call it to- 
gether? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were they not sworn to obey implicit- 
ly his order ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then could he, or could he not, order 
them to come here armed, as he chose, 
Was that not in accordance with the obli- 
gations of the order? 

A. It was not so far as I understood it. 

Q. I ask you the plain, simple question, 
whether or not, according to the Consti- 
tution of that order, you were not to obey 
him implicitly over and above all other 
commands ? Did you ever see the consti- 
tution and laws of the order? 

A. I saw them as they were published in 
the Indianapolis Journal I saw the book 
containing them, but never read it? 

Q. Would you recognize them if you saw 
the books? 

A. Yes, sir ; I think I should. 

Q. The Judge Advocate here handed the 
witness a copy of the Constitution of the 
Supreme Council of the oi-der, and asked, 
is this one of the books you saw ? 

A. It looks something like it. 

Q. Will you read section 17 of the Gen- 
eral Laws? 

A. The witness read the following : 

"Sec. 17. The Grand Commanders shall 
be the presiding oflficers of the Grand Coun- 
cils of the States, execute all laws passed 
by such Councils, and shall be commanders- 
in-chief of the military forces of their re- 
spective States." 

What I saw was the ritual and the oath ; 
I never saw this before. 

The Judge Advocate here handed the 
witness a pamphlet containing the Ritual 
of the third degree, and asked : 

Q. Is that not the Ritual of the third de- 
gree? 

A. That is what it purports to be. 

The Judge Advocate then read the fol- 
lowing portion of the obligation: 

"I do further swear, that I will, at all 
times and in all places, yield prompt and 
implicit obedience to the utmost of my 
ability without remonstrance, hesitation or 



delay, to any and every mandate, order or 
request, of my immediate M. E. G. C.,* in 
all things touching the purposes of the O. 
S. L., and to defend the principles thereof, 
when assailed in my own State or country, 
in whatsoever capacity may be assigned to 
me by authority of our order." 

Q. Is that one of the obligations taken 
by the order ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I will ask you again, whether the 
Grand Commander had power to call this 
order together, and to give them such or- 
ders as he sa-w proper? 

A. Yes, sir. That matter came up for 
discussion, I think. I asked the Grand 
Commander the question, when I went into 
the order, whether there was any obliga- 
tion that would violate my duties or my 
obligations as a citizen, and he said there 
was not. I think that was the construc- 
tion placed upon this obligation : that there 
would be nothing violating our obligation 
as citizens. 

Q. You have spoken of this uprising on 
the 1 6th. By whom was it contempla- 
ted? 

A. Dodd gave me no information but 
this, that he desired me to call a mas5 
meeting of the Democracy, and under 
cover of that he could accomplish his 
ends. 

Q. How? 

A. By revolution. 

Q. Who were to inaugurate that revolu- 
tion? 

A. He expected the men that cam© here 
to do it. 

Q. Who were to come here? 

A. That he never explained to me. 

Q. Who, did you gather from what he 
said, would do it? 

A. I should infer from what he said that 
he expected the assistance of the members 
of the order. 

Q. Were any promises or pledges, or 
threats made, on behalf of the Govern- 
ment, to induce you to give this testimony? 

A. None whatever. 

I think it is due to this Court and to the 
Judge Advocate, to state that this state- 
ment is made voluntarily. That I intended 
to have made it in writing and pubUsh it 
for my ovvn vindication. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
at 2 o'clock, P. M. 



AFTERNOON SESSION. 

CouET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
October 28, 18C1, 2 o'clock, P. M.t 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present; also, the Judge 
Advocate, the accused and their counsel. 



Moat Excellent Grand Commander. 



106 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Felix G. Stidger, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testi- 
fied as follows: 

Question by the Judge Advocate : 

State your name, place of residence, and 
business for the last two or three years ? 

Answer. Felix G. Stidger: I live in Mat- 
toon, Illinois. For the last two or three 
years I have been in the dry goods business, 
and I have been a carpenter, and served in 
the army. 

Q. Where did you reside immediately pre- 
ceding your liviYig at Mattoon, Illinois ? 

A. At Louisville. Kentucky. I came there 
on the 15th of April, 1864. 

Q. Where previous to that? 

A. At Taylorsville, Kentucky. 

Q. How long did you reside there ? 

A. Two months after leaving the army. 

Q. When did you leave the army ? 

A. On -the morning of the 14th of Feb- 
ruary I received my discharge. 

Q. From what regiment were you dis- 
charged? 

A. From the 15th Regiment Kentucky 
Volunteer Infantry. I was discharged for 
physical disability. 

Q. Were you with your regiment ? 

A. No, sir; not a day. I served as clerk 
in the Adjutant General's ofBce, 1st Divis- 
ion, 14th Army Corps. 

Q. Who was the Adjutant General ? 

A. Major McDowell, Captain Taylor, now 
Colonel 15th Kentucky Volunteers, Captain 
Nevin, Lieutenant Colonel Lyme Starling, 
formerly chief of General Crittenden's 
staff, and when I left Captain Wells was 
Assistant Adjutant General. 

Q. Who commanded the corps ? 

A. General Thomas, and part of the time 
General Palmer. 

Q. What particular duties did you per- 
form as clerk ? 

A. Applications for resignations, leave of 
absence, furloughs, sometimes reports of 
the troops, and special and general orders. 

Q. Please state to the Court how your 
attention was first called to the Order of 
the Sons of Liberty ; and when, if ever, 
you joined them ? 

A. 1 was in Captain Jones' office on the 
morning of the 5th of May, 1864, and he 
showed me a letter from General Carring- 
ton, stating something in reference to Dr. 
Bowles being a dangerous man, and re- 
questing him to send a Kentuckian to him; 
on the receipt of that letter, Captain Jones 
sent me to Dr. Bowles. I I'eceived instruc- 
tions in the Vestibule, or Neophyte Degree, 
on that morning; Mr. Prentice instructed 
me before I went to see Dr. Bowles. That 
was on the 5th of May, 1864. I started to 
see Dr. Bowles on the morning of the 6th, 
and arrived at his house on the 8th. He re- 
Bides at French Lick Springs, Orange coun- 
ty, Indiana. 



Q. Did you go directly to his house? 
A. No, sir; I stopped at Salem, thinking 
that was the nearest railroad point, but 
I found it was twenty odd miles to French 
Lick Springs, and no regular conveyance. 
By going further up the railroad to Orleans, 
it was not so far; there was a regular con- 
veyance all the time. I stepped oflf the 
train at Salem about 11 in the morning of 
the 6th of May, and remained there until 
the night train came along, which was 
probably 10 o'clock; I then went to Orleans 
and staid there till 12 o'clock the next day, 
Saturday the 7th, when I took the regular 
conveyance out to Paoli. On the 8th 1 went 
to Dr. Bowles' house. On the way to Mr. 
Bowies', I saw Mr. Heff'ren at Salem. 

Q. State how you happened to meet him, 
and your conversation with him. 

A. I fell in with a man by the name of 
Drom. I think he stated his name was 
John, but I am not sure whether it was 
John or S. He is a clothing merchant, 
and keeps a store. He saw Mr. Hefifren 
walking across the square, and remarked 
that there was one of the Democratic lead- 
ers of that part of the country. He said 
something about Heffren wearing a butter- 
nut pin, and that there had been something 
said about taking it oft" him, and that if 
it had been done there would have been 
one thousand or fifteen hundred men ready 
to revenge the insult. Drom told Heffren 
that I was from Kentucky; HeSren came 
up and asked if I wished to see him. He 
then went on to tell me that he was ex- 
pecting a commissioner from Kentucky, 
from the rebel forces there; and I told him 
about three of Forrest's regiments being 
disbanded there — in the State of Ken- 
tucky. 

Q. Did he explain what he meant by the 
word "commissioner?" 

A. Not at that time; afterward he did. 
I told him of the three regiments of For- 
rest's men having been disbanded, and he 
told me that there were four more to be 
disbanded. This was what he was expect^ 
ing to hear of, and was expecting a com- 
missioner from the forces in Kentucky to 
see him that day or the next, and he did 
not know but 1 was probably the man, as I 
came from Kentucky. I knew nothing 
more about these three Kentticky regi- 
ments being disbanded than what I had 
seen in the newspapers. I understood they 
were furloughed soldiers who were to re- 
main at home a certain time, and at a cer- 
tain signal they were to concentrate when- 
ever ordered. Mr. Ileftren told me during 
the evening that he could call together, 
within twenty-four hours, from one thou- 
sand to fifteen luuidred armed men in that 
section, in connection with that secret or- 
ganization. He did not say particularly 
for what purpose he could call them. He 
asked me if I knew any thing about the 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



107 



Democratic organization ; I said I was a 
member of the first degree of it. He did 
not mention the name of the order. 

Q. What further conversation had you 
with Heffren? 

A. 1 had no particular conversation with 
him that evening; he promised to see me 
after supper; but his wife being ill, he did 
not come. 

Q. Did you state your name and business 
to him ? 

A, I believe I told him my name was 
Grundy, but 1 did not state my business at 
all 

Q. What time did you leave him ? 

A. I suppose it was about sundown when 
he left me to go home. He warned me of some 
twoorthreegentlemen whom hepointed out; 
one was Joe Faulkner; that I must be par- 
ticular about what I said ; for he told me he 
was a United States Detective. He also re- 
ferred me to the Persise House as being of 
a difi:erent stripe to the one I was stopping 
at, which was known as a Union House. 
He remarked to a gentleman that evening, 
or a gentleman asked him why a certain 
lady was sent from Kentucky; he said he 
didn't know why it was, except that they 
expected trouble in Kentucky, and that this 
would be a safer place. He also said, that 
if Lee succeeded in permanently holding 
Pennsylvania, and some one else some other 
point, as he understood it — "things would 
be difl'erent." 

Q. What "things" did he refer to? 

A. I suppose he meant the workings of 
the Government. I left him that night and 
went to Orleans? 

Q. When did you see Dr. Bowles ? 

A. I went there Sunday morning ; got 
there about 10 or 11 o'clock. He was from 
home, and did not return till 6 or 7 in the 
evening. His wife gave me an introduction 
to him. My name was given as J. J. Grundy. 
1 gave this name to Mr. Banning, the keeper 
of the house, and he so registered it. My 
first conversation with Bowles was on Mon- 
day evening. He asked me if I knew any 
thing about the Democratic organization. 
I told him I was a member of the first de- 
gree of it. He did not test me as to whether 
I was a member. He told me I was sur- 
rounded by members of that order. He 
told me that he was a military chief of the 
order, and that a man by the name of 
Wright, of St. Louis, was the civil chief, and 
that the order was numerous. He gave me 
the name of Mr. Halloway. and said he was 
the only man in Illinois that he could put 
his finger on with reliability. He said the 
forces of Indiana would concentrate in Ken- 
tucky, and make Kentucky their battle 
ground ; that the forces in Illinois would 
concentrate in St. Louis, and co-operate 
vrith the forces in Missouri; that Illinois 
would furnish 50,000, Missouri 30,000, and 
Price was to invade the State with 20,OUO 



men; with that 100,000 men they were to 
hold and permanently occupy that State, 
and the troops of Indiana and Ohio concen- 
trate at Louisville. I also heard him speak 
of a man by the name of Stone ; who said 
he had organized a regiment of men in six 
weeks in this State, (Indiana,) and that he 
expected him to raise another regiment. 
He spoke of another man named Dickerson, 
who went to Richmond at his pleasure. He 
lived in Baltimore. H-=, wanted to know 
how many men Kentucky could fur- 
nish, and stated that a rebel force under 
Buckner would come into the eastern part 
of the State, and with these forces they in- 
tended to hold Kentucky. At that time 
no time had been set for the movement. 

Q. Did you learn from him, or not, that 
this organization, or secret order, was to act 
in conjunction with the rebel forces? 

A. They were. He told me that thia 
order was made out of the Knights of the 
Golden Circle, of which he had been a mem- 
ber, and that he resurrected this order out 
of it. He appeared to claim a great deal of 
credit. 

Q. Was any thing else said at that meet- 
ing between you and Bowles ? 

A. These were the important parts. 

Q. Where did you go afterward ? 

A. 1 went back to Kentucky. He was 
anxious I should use all my exertions in ex- 
tending the order as much as possible. 
Bowles told me there was to be a meeting in 
Indianapolis in about two weeks tiom then ; 
and said he would get other reports from 
Kentucky, but he wanted me to go to Ken- 
tucky and see what could be done; he was 
anxious to know what he could report at that 
meeting. 

I arrived at Dr. Bowles' on the 8th of May, 
1864; stayed at his house four days, and re- 
turned to Kentucky about the 12th or 13th 
of May. 

Q. Who did you see upon your I'eturn 
that was connected with this order ? 

A. Dr. Kalfus was the only one I knew 
to be connected with it. I had some talk 
with him, and he further initiated me into 
the order. 

Q. What degrees did you receive from 
him ? 

A. He gave me the first degree. I had 
previously taken only the Vestibule degree. 

Q,. Did you meet Judge Bullitt, of Ken- 
tucky? 

A. Not until after the second interview 
with Bowles. I started from Louisville about 
two weeks after my return from Bowies', 
probably on the 24th or 25th of May. I did 
not go direct to Dr. Bowles, but stopped at 
Salem to see Heff'ren. I saw him and had 
some talk with him. He told me he had 
been to Indianapolis, and had seen Mr. H. H. 
Dodd, and that they had concluded to call a 
meeting of the organization some day be- 
tween the I3th and IGth of June. He said 



108 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



they were the only two men in the State 
who had the power to call that meeting; 
that was himself (IletiVen) and Dodd; and 
that the organization of the State was now 
about complete ; that it would number be- 
tween 75,000 and 80,000 men. 

Q. Did you register your name at Salem ? 

A. If I did, it was as J. J. Grundy. 

Q. Where did you have this talk with 
Heffren? 

A. It was in the sitting-room of the Per- 
sise House, on or about the 25th of May. 

Q. How are you enabled to fix that date? 

A. By its being on Wednesday, near two 
weeks after my return from seeing Dr. 
Bowles the first time. 

Q. Did you make any report of your visit 
at that time ? 

A. I made my report to Captain Jones, and 
lunderstandhe sent it toGeneral Burbridge. 

Q. State the particulars of your second 
visit to Dr. Bowles ? 

A. I left Salem about II o'clock in the 
morning, and arrived at Dr. Bowles' that 
evening. He was not at home. That was 
on Wednesday. He returned Saturday, at 
noon. At his home no one appeared to 
know where he had gone. He told me him- 
self, that he had been to Indianapolis ; had 
seen Mr. Dodd, Mr. Barrett, of Missouri, 
Judge Bullitt, and some other gentlemen; 
and that there would be a meeting of the 
Grand Council on the 14th of June. He 
told me that Barrett pledged from Missouri 
30,000 men, and that Illinois pledged 50,000. 
The leaders of those States pledged that 
number of men. The forces of Illinois and 
Missouri were to co-operate with Price. He 
said that 20,000 men or more, if Jeff Davis 
could spare them, were to be sent into Mis- 
souri. He told me, also, that Indiana 
pledged 40,000, which were to co-operate 
"with those from Ohio, concentrate near Lou- 
isville, and co-operate with whatever troops 
Jeff Davis could send into Kentucky under 
Buckner or Breckinridge ; or, if he thought 
it advisable, he would send Longstreet with 
them. They had no regular communication 
■with Ohio, but had made arrangements to 
open up regular communication with their 
friends there. He also told me of the 
change in the Supreme Commander to Val- 
landigham, and that he had been appointed 
a commissioner to visit Vallandigham in 
Canada. 

Q. What further conversation had you 
with Dr. Bowles, at that time ? 

A. He told me that on the Sunday which 
was the 22d of May, that himself, Mr. Dodd, 
and a Dutch chemist, whom he had known 
for years, and a number of other men, while 
people thought they were at church, were 
in a basement, experimenting with Greek 
fire, which they had now brought to perfec- 
tion, through this Dutch chemist; that they 
intended to use it for the destruction of 
Government property ; that the Jeff Davis 



Government was to pay them ten per cent, 
for all the property destroyed, taking the 
estimate, as given in the Northern jiapers, 
of the amount destroyed. He also told me 
that the two boats burned at the Louisville 
wharf last spring, and boats belonging to 
the Government that had been destroyed 
on the Mississippi river, and elsewhere, had 
been burned by this Greek fire. 

Q. Did he then, or at any other time, 
show you an instrument that would be used 
for that purpose? 

A. Yes, sir, he did. 

A conical shell was here handed to the 
witness. [See Illustrations.] 

Q. Have you ever seen this or a similar 
instrument? 

A. I saw a shell similar to this, at Mr. 
Bocking's room, at the Louisville Hotel, 
Louisville. 

Q. Who were present ? 

A. Dr. Bowles, Booking, Kalfus, Boyd, 
Winchester, Miller, and a number of others. 

Q. Were they members of the order ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You may explain how the shell works. 

A. The space between the innermost 
cast and the inner shell was to be filled 
with liquid Greek fire. The space between 
the inner and outer shell is designed to give 
room for the inner shell to easily move so as 
to strike the percussion cap, when projec- 
ted from a gun, at the moment of striking 
an object, igniting the powder and bursting 
the shell. At the same time the Greek fire 
is ignited. 

A spherical shell was hero handed to the 
witness. [See Illustrations.] 

Q. Was there a weapon similar to this 
shown you by Booking? 

A. Booking had none of them at that 
time, but he di-ew a diagram of them, and 
explained the principle of their action to 
them. 

Q. You may describe its mode of action? 

A. The glass vial inside of the inner shell 
contains Greek fire, and after it is placed in 
the inner shell, is surrounded with powder. 
The inner shell is capped with percussion caps 
placed on the nipples, which are so arranged 
that at the moment it strikes, the three caps 
will be exploded, no matter how it falls. It 
could be thrown by the hand, and on strik- 
ing any thing the caps would burst, igniting 
the powder and bursting the shell. 

Booking, who had some of the Greek fire 
and experimented with it, also said that the 
liquid fire if thrown in a vial would burn 
any thing against which it was thrown. Ho 
also explained a kind of clock machine, 
which, being wound up, would run a certain 
length of time, and at that point would 
in some way ignite the Greek fire, and a con- 
flagration would be the result. He did not 
have one of these machines, but said he 
could make them for the benefit of the 
Order of Sons of Liberty. He also showed 



1 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



109 



the muster roll of a battery, which he said 
he had been authorized to raise, and this 
musterroU exhibited nothing but a listof the 
rebel prisoners confined in one of the prisons 
of the United States, and he said that every 
one of those enlisted in his battery, were 
enlisted with the understanding that at the 
first opportunity they were to desert to the 
enemy, and that one section had deserted 
and taken over two of the guns. This was 
said in the presence of Dr. Bowles. 

Q. When was this meeting held? 

A. On the 28th of June, at Louisville, in 
Bocking's room. 

Q. State what took place in the interview 
with Dr. Bowles on the 26th of May. What 
did he say in that interview about Greek 
fire? 

A. He said they had been experimenting, 
and had got it about perfect ; that Bullitt 
knew how it was made; that he wished me 
to go home and get the order organized and 
spread over the State, and he wanted me to 
impress upon the people the idea of this 
Greek fire, that they would thereby come 
more readily into the order. He was arixi- 
ous I should make Judge Bullitt's acquaint- 
ance, and assist him all I could. From Dr. 
Bowles I went back to Louisville, and 
carried a message to Judge Bullitt. He 
told me to make Bullitt's acquaintance, and 
say to him that he had seen Mr. Andrew 
Humphreys since their meeting in Indian- 
apolis, and Mr. Humphreys had agreed to 
take the position of a brigadier general and 
charge of the forces in the rear in case of 
an uprising of the order. 

Q. Did you not speak of Hefiren as the 
person you saw at Salem ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Can you identify him as one of the ac- 
cused? 

A. Yes, sir. 

[The witness here pointed to the accused, 
Horace HeftVen.] 

Q. Is that the same man with whom you 
had the conversation at Salem? 

A. It is, sir. 

Q. You stated, did you not, that Hum- 
phreys would take charge of the forces in 
the rear? 

A, Yes, sir. But Bowles did not say what 
they were to do. We were talking of the 
order, and I suppose he meant the forces 
comprised all the members of the order. 

Q. Did you see Judge Bullitt? 

A. I did. 

Q. Was he a member of the order ? 

A. Yes, sir, he was. 

Q. You may state what was done and 
said in your interview with Judge Bullitt. 

A. I made his acquaintance, and told him 
what Bowles had told me to tell him. He 
said it suited him exactly, that Humphreys 
was willing to take that position. 

Q. What position did he refer to? 

A. It seems that Humphreys had been 



known as a Major General in the order. 
Bullitt said: "I have spent a good deal of 
money in this affair, and I am willing to 
spend every cent I have; for I hope soon to 
be able to steal a good living from these 
damned sons of bitches." 

Q. What official position did Bullitt hold 
at that time? 

A. He was one of the Judges of the Su- 
preme Court of Appeals of the State of 
Kentucky. 

Q. Had you any further conversation ? 

A. Not until a day or two afterward. 
There were Judge Bullitt, Dr. Chambers, of 
Gallatin county, Mr. Kalfus, D. C. Whips, 
Mr. Piper, of Springfield, Illinois, and my- 
self, in Kalfus' office — in his private room. 
Chambers had just come down from Gal- 
latin county, for the purpose of getting in- 
struction in the work of organizing his 
county; there was something said about a 
man by the name of Coffin having been 
in the room with Dr. Bowles and others 
in this city. Chambers said he knew Cof- 
fin, that he was a United States Detective, 
and called him a good many hard names; 
he knew he was a United States Detective, 
he had been a stanch Union man — and 
that was the only evidence he had of his 
being a United States Detective. After 
talking the matter over, they decided he 
should be murdered. Dr. Bowles had been 
instrumental in getting him into the order, 
and they thought that Bowles ought to be 
instrumental in getting him out. They de- 
termined to put him out of the way ; he 
was a United States Detective, and he 
should be murdered at all hazards. They 
sent me with these instructions to Bowles, 
and I was to go to Indianapolis and get 
some constitutions of the order, and I was 
to inform Dodd, and whoever I might see, 
to be on their guard, and do all they could 
to get shut of him. 

Q. Who sent you ? 

A. It was with the unanimous consent of 
all parties that I was sent. 

Q. Who were they? 

A. Judge Bullitt, Mr. Piper, Dr. Cham- 
bers, Dr. Kalfus, and D. C. Whips; they 
gave me that message to Dr. Bowles; I 
started on the next day, which was about 
the first day of June, and took the message 
to Dr. Bowles. I saw him that same eve- 
ning. 

Q. What did you say to him ? 

A. I told him what was the decision of 
Judge Bullitt and others in Louisville; that 
Coffin was unquestionably a United States 
Detective; and that as he had been instru- 
mental in getting him into the order, he 
ought to be instrumental in getting him 
out. He said he knew that two men at 
the Shoals had initiated Mr. Coffin, and he 
knew he had been in the United States 
employ, but he could explain that to their 
satisfaction. " But," he said, " I will put two 



no 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



men on his track." He gave me their sur- 
names, but I do not remember them. He 
told me to say that he would put two men 
on his track. He did not seem to think 
CofRn was a dangerous man at all. 

Q, Where did you go after that inter- 
view ? 

A. To Indianapolis. 

Q. Had you any further conversation 
with Bowles? 

A. I revealed to him my true name, and 
explained to him why I had come to him 
under an assumed name. I told him that 
when I came to Louisville, I had been 
watched on the streets by a United States 
Detective — which was true — and to avoid 
being troubled by that man I had to go 
somewhere else, and that I had come to 
his house to escape him, and that was the 
reason why I had come to his house under 
an assumed name. 

Q. At that time did you hold any office? 
If so, what? 

A. Not until the first of June. From Dr. 
Bowles' I went to Indianapolis and saw Mr. 
Dodd and Mr. Harrison. I also received 
an introduction to Mr. Bingham and Dr. 
Oatling. The first man I saw to whom I 
made myself known was Mr. Dodd. I 
stopped at the Palmer House and register- 
ed under my real name, Felix G. Stidger. 
It was on the first Saturday in June that I 
arrived here. 

Q. Where did you see Dodd? 

A. Judge Bullitt directed me how to go 
from that house to Dodd's building that I 
might be able to find it without inquiring 
of any one, and creating suspicion. I went 
there, but did not find him. I inquired 
where he lived, and went out to his house. 
I was told there he had gone down town, 
and that I would probably find him at 
Bingham's office. I went to Mr. Bingham's 
office and found him there. I gave him the 
letter of introduction from Judge Bullitt ; 
and Mr. Dodd then called out to Mr. Bing- 
ham and Dr. Gatling and gave my intro- 
duction to them. Mr. Dodd invited me 
and Dr. Gatling to go up to his office. 

Q. What passed between you and Dodd 
at his office? 

A. I told him that he had neglected to 
put up the constitutions in the books Bul- 
litt had brought. I also spoke about Coffin, 
and said that Bowles would put two men 
on his track, but I had forgotten their 
names. Gatling came up in the office dur- 
ing the time I was there, but I do not re- 
member whether he was present at the 
lime or not. 

Q. What else occurred ? 

A. Dodd went with me to Harrison's 
house, and he inquired of some persons in 
the building if they knew where Mr. Har- 
rison lived. Some one told him where he 
lived, and we went out to Harrison's house. 
He showed him my letter of introduction 



from Bullitt, and said that I would like to 
see him at his office in the evening. I saw 
him at his office in the evening, and had 
some conversation with him. He gave 
me the rituals and constitution of the or- 
der, and the address of the Grand Com- 
mander of the State of Indiana, delivered 
on the 16th or 17th of February, and also 
instructed me in the third degree of the or- 
der; I never took the obligation, but he in- 
structed me in it. 

Q. Did you receive any money from mem- 
bers of the order ? 

A. Judge Bullitt gave me a check on the 
Bank of Kentucky for $25. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with 
Dr. Gatling in Dodd's office? 

A. There was something said about his 
coffee-mill gun, and he remarked that he 
was glad the Government did not take it, 
as he wanted it for the South; that he had 
sent a man to Europe, or had made ar- 
rangements to send him, to have it patented 
for the use of the South. 

Q. Was Dodd present? 

A. Yes, sir ; he was. 

The Judge Advocate here handed the 
witness a pamphlet containing Dodd's ad- 
dress. [See Appendix.] 

Q. Is that the address you referred to? 

A. Yes, sir ; Harrison gave me a copy of 
that for Judge Bullitt. 

Q. Did you take them to Judge Bullitt ? 

A. Yes, sir. I saw many copies of them in 
Harrison's office. This is the book they 
used for their secret cypher in this city. 
By it they sent all important communica- 
tions through the mail. Harrison told me 
that was the book they used for their se- 
cret cypher. Bullitt and Bowles also told 
me about the secret cypher, and that a 
person might get hold of that secret cypher, 
but if he had not the key, he could not 
read it. 

Q. You may explain how the book is 
used for the secret cypher. 

A. We counted from the left, and used fig- 
ures entirely to spell words. If I wanted 
to spell the word "the," I would put the 
figure "3" at the top of the page to indi- 
cate the page of the book I used. I would 
put the figure 6 in brackets, as indicating 
the line of that page, and then 1, 2 and 3, 
to denote that they were the first, second, 
and third letters of that line. 

Q. Did any thing take place at Dodd's 
office that day? 

A. No, sir; not that I recollect. 

Q. Did you see Dodd again at that 
time ? 

A. I came here on Saturday evening, and 
went home on Monday morning. I did 
not see Dodd again, and had so further 
consultation with him. I saw General Car- 
rington and Governor Morton while here, 
and I made known to them what I had 
done. General Carrington copied the works 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Ill 



I had with me. I went back to Louisville 
from here, and took some books. 
Q. What were those books ? 

A, The constitutions of the county tem- 
ples, of the Grand Council of the State, 
and of the Supreme Council of the United 
States, and one or two rituals of the order, 
also an address of the Grand Commander 
of the State of Indiana. I delivered them 
first to Dr. Kalfus, and when Dr. Kalfus 
returned them I gave them to Judge Bul- 
litt. I arrived at Louisville on Monday, 
about the 4th of June. It was immedi- 
ately after my appointment as Grand Sec- 
retai-y of the State of Kentucky by Judge 
Bullitt. The date of that appointment was 
about the 4th or 5th of June. 

Q. Was that appointment vei'bal or writ- 
ten? 

A. We did nothing in writing that we 
could avoid. I was to receive a salary, but 
there was nothing stipulated ; we were to go 
according to the Constitution of the Grand 
Council of the State of Indiana. I was to 
receive, as I understood, about $800 per 
annum. 

Q. Did you ever receive pay for the posi- 
tion you held? 

A. I received pay from the members of 
the order, and I collected the initiation fee, 
and was told by Kalfus and Bullitt to keep 
it for my pay. I received about $200. 

Q. What office did Judge Bullitt hold? 

A. He was elected Grand Commander of 
the State. At that time he was the only 
Grand Councilman in the State. He was 
elected at the meeting of the Grand Coun- 
cil by members of the different counties of 
the State of Kentucky. I was not at that 
meeting. I was at the meeting of the 
Grand Council in Kentucky on the night 
of the 27th of June, 1864. 

Q. Who was present at that meeting? 

i. Judge Bullitt, Mr. W. K. Thomas, a 
Mr. John J. Felix, of Lawrenceburg, Ken- 
tucky, two gentlemen from Paris, and Mi-. 
T. J. Bosley ; D. C. Wipps, who was treas- 
urer of the Grand Council, was there ; also 
Judge G. Williams, of Hancock county, 
and some others 1 do not now remember. 
There was also a Mr. Tirrell, of Owen coun- 
ty, or Boone county ; he had formerly been 
in the Federal army. There were about 
sixteen or seventeen persons present. 

Q. Was any business transacted ? 

A. Delegat.e8 were elected to attend the 
Supreme Council in Chicago on the first 
day of July. Judge Bullitt, by virtue of 
his office as Grand Commander, was a 
member. Prior, Winchester and Wipps 
were all three elected. 

Q. Was any other business of importance 
transacted at that meeting? Any talk 
there with reference to the sentiments of 
the order? 

A. Mr. Bosley made a short speech about 
the operations in his part of the country ; 



he is from Shelby county ; and Judge Wil- 
liams also made a short sjDeech, I believe, 
about the operations and organization of 
his county, and of its action in connection 
with the uprising to resist the Government. 
This received the general sanction of all 
present. 

Q. Did you attend any meeting in this 
State before that ? 

A. Yes, sir; on the 14th of June. I was 
told by Dr. Bowles when the meeting would 
be held, and also by Mr. Dodd. They both 
said they would like me to be here if I 
could come, and I did come. 

Q. Who was present at that meeting ? 

A. The meeting was held ijn the building 
occupied by Dodd as a printing establish- 
ment. Dodd was present 4nd presided 
over the meeting. Mr. Harrison was there 
as Secretary. Mr. Heffren's name was called 
as Deputy Grand Commander, but he 
was not present. Mr. Bowles, Mr. Milligan 
and Mr. Humphreys were there. Mr. Dodd 
told me it was Andrew Humphreys. I 
think I know Mr. Humphreys, but I could 
not swear to him positively. Mr. Milligan, 
whom I see present in this room, (the wit- 
ness here pointed to the accused, L. P. 
Milligan,) is the same that was present; 
also Dr. Bowles, one of the accused. There 
was a Judge Borton, or Borden, also pres- 
ent. A Mr. Otey, an old gentleman, was 
there; also, Mr. Gatling, and Dr Athon, 
Secretary of State; Mr. McBride, from 
Evansville, and a Mr. Everett, from 
Evansville, also a Mr. Thompson. I re- 
member his being appointed on a com- 
mittee. Thompson and, I think. Dr. Athon 
and McBride were the three gentlemen 
appointed on that committee to exam- 
ine an invention that had been inven- 
ted by a member of the order, and the 
committee reported that the invention was 
a good one, and ought to be adopted by 
the order; they recommended that it be 
turned over to the Committee of Thirteen, 
who should distribute it to those members 
of the order that in their judgment might 
be intrusted with it. I know he was on 
two committees during the day. There 
was also a committee on military affairs, 
and one on the subject of education. Mil- 
ligan, Bowles, McBride and Dr. Gatling 
were four of the military committee, the 
other I do not remember. 

Q. Was any thing reported by the Mili- 
tary Committee? 

A. Yes, sir ; they reported a bill setting 
forth their views, that the order ought to 
be organized as a military organization at 
once, and armed. 

Q. When was this ? 

A. This was on the 14th of June. Dodd, 
at the opening of the meeting, read an ad- 
dress to consider if the order had any poli- 
tics, and if so, what they were. The sub- 
ject of education was considered, and also 



112 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



if the time for action was not at hand. 
These were the main points of his address. 

Q. "Were any military appointments made 
at that meeting ? 

Yes, sir; one Mr. Walker was elected a 
Major General. There were elections of 
delegates to the Supreme Council, which 
was a meeting of delegates from the differ- 
ent State Councils, to be held at Chicago on 
the first day of July. 

Q. Who was elected ? 

A. Mr. Dodd, by 'virtue of his rank as 
Grand Commander, was one; J. G. Davis 
and Mr. Lasselle were elected; and the 
Major Generals, by virtue of their rank, 
were ex officio members. 

Q. Do you know who were the Major 
Generals of the order at that time ? 

A. Mr. Milligan, Mr. Bowles, Mr. Humph- 
reys and Mr. Walker, who was elected vice 
Mr. Yeakle, who, it seems, had been a Ma- 
jor General, but was now thrown out. 
Walker was said to be a man who had some 
military experience. 

Q. Was there any protest on the part of 
Milligan on his accepting this appointment? 

A. Not a word. They were not elected 
that day; they had been elected before. 
Mr. Dodd called over their names as Major 
Generals. Walker was the only Major Gen- 
eral elected that day. 

Q. Did any thing else take place at that 
meeting? 

A. The subject of Mr. Coffin was dis- 
cussed at considerable length. McBride, 
of Evansville, had a great deal to say about 
it. He knew Coffin about Evansville as a 
Government Detective; that he had been 
engaged in sending contraband goods South, 
they were taken, and it got the people into 
trouble; he believed that he was still in that 
kind of business. McBride also said he 
had a report of the order known as the 
Loyal League; that he had men in the 
order who reported to him every thing that 
occurred; he said a good deal about the 
Government damning secret organizations, 
when here was one they supported them- 
selves. He also said that the men of Van- 
derburg and Posey counties were members 
of*thi8 order, and also several of the Home 
Guard companies of the Legion, and he 
said that two or three companies there who 
had Government arms, were under his con- 
trol He said something about an election 
there, when the members of this order went 
to the polls armed; the members of the 
Home Guards were there, also armed, he 
said, but they knew the members of the 
order were armed, and did not attempt to 
do any thing. He did not say how he knew 
those other men were armed, but McBride 
said the members of the order were armed. 

Q. What else was done at this meeting? 

A. The meetmg. generally, was appointed 
a committee to attend a meeting at Hamil- 
ton, Ohio. Coffin was expected to be there. 



He had not been seen for several days, and 
was supposed to be there. Dodd volun- 
teered his services to go to Hamilton, and 
if Coffin was there, pick a quarrel with him 
and shoot him. He wanted to know who 
would go with him. McBride said he knew 
Coffin, but he was sorry, he said, that his 
business was such that he could not go. 
Bowles, Dodd, Milligan and myself, went to 
Hamilton the next day. 

Q. Did you see Dodd or Bowles at Ham- 
ilton? 

A. Yes, su'. I went up to Dodd and 
Bowles after Vallandigham had got through 
speaking, to bid them good-by, as I was 
starting for Cincinnati; and Bowles leaned 
down and asked me if I had seen Coffin. 
I said, "I don't know the man." They 
then remembered that I had previously 
told them that I did not know him. They 
said they did not think Coffin was there, as 
they could not find him. 

Q. What did Dodd say at the meeting? 

A. I do not remember any thing, sav** 
that he said that Government detectives 
ought to be murdered; he might have said 
killed. He said if Coffin was at Hamilton, 
he would pick a quarrel with him and shoot 
him. 

Q. Where did you go then? 

A. To Cincinnati, and thence to Louis- 
ville. 

Q. When were you here next ? 

A. I got to Louisville on Thursday night, 
and came up here about the first of the 
next week — some time during the week. I 
then saw Dodd and Harrison, and Mr. Jo- 
seph Ristine, Auditor of State. 

Q. Was any thing said or done? 

A. I was sent by Judge Bullitt to see 
about the dispatch which he had received? 

Q. What was that ? 

A. The dispatch was something about 
Aunt Lucy being sick, and he wanted to 
know if such a dispatch had been received. 
Dodd knew nothing about the dispatch. 
He asked me if I knew what Aunt Lucy 
meant. I said I did, and told him it had 
reference to the Southern Confederacy; and 
he seemed to be satisfied. Bullitt also said 
something about a letter that Mr. Dodd 
had gotten. It was a letter to Dodd, Bowles 
and Ristine, and signed "Dick." He warned 
them against a man named Coffin. Dodd 
showed me the letter; he then took me 
down to the office of Ristine, and they said 
they supposed the letter was written by 
Dick Bright. Dodd gave me an introduc- 
tion to Ristine's son, and requested me to 
stay pretty much all day, and see if Coffin 
passed by — if so, have Ristine's son point 
him out to me. They succeeded in point- 
ing him out to me, about sundown. I staid 
there pretty near half a day. I had some 
talk with Ristine about this letter, but I 
don't remember whether any thing was said 
about the order or not. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



113 



Q. Did any thing further take place at 
Indianapohs during that visit? 

A. Not that 1 recollect. 

Q. Where did you go next? 

A. From here I went back to Louisville. 
There I saw Thomas, Bullitt, Kalfus and 
others, in Kalfus' office. I was initiated into 
the order at Louisville. 

Q. When were you here next after that? 

A. I was here the next time about the 
last of July. I then saw Dodd, Dr. Athon 
and Mr. Harrison. 

Q. Did you learn any thing of import- 
ance? 

A. Yes, sir; Judge Bullitt had started to 
Chicago on the evening of the 19th of July. 
He said that Dodd and a number of the 
other leaders of the order from this State 
and Illinois were to be at Chicago to have a 
conference there. Bullitt started to Chi- 
cago on the 19th of July. We expected 
him back in four or five days, and as he did 
not come on Thursday night, July 28, I 
came up here, and on Friday morning I 
saw Dodd coming up from toward the depot. 
I went down to his ofiice about 10 o'clock, 
and he told me he had just come into the 
city on a train. He said Judge Bullitt 
would be at home on that day or Saturday; 
He thought likely he might go through 
here, but he was not sure. He therefore 
wished me to go home and get twenty or 
thirty good runners, so that as soon as 
Judge Bullitt returned they might be sent 
off. He said the programme was arranged, 
and every thing ready. I went to see Dr. 
Athon, and had some talk with him. Dodd 
went around without me, and said, "You 
can come around after a bit." He didn't 
want both of us seen going there together, 
as he thought it would look suspicious. 

Q. What did Dodd tell him ? 

A. He did not tell him that the time was 
set, but I told Dr. Athon afterward what 
Dodd had said. 

Q. When did you tell him that ? 

A. I told Dr. Athon of it the same day. 
Athon did not seem to think that the time 
had come yet for revolution, but that it 
would come. He said it would not be suc- 
cessful now. 

Q. Did he discourage you in any way ? 

A. No, sir. He said the time had not 
come, but that the time would come when 
it would be successful. 

Q. Did Dodd open to you this scheme, in 
any way ? 

A. No, sir. He told me there was to be 
a meeting of some of the heads of the order 
here on the Tuesday following, and he 
would like Judge Bullitt to be here; and 
he wished me to tell him to come, or send 
some reliable man that he could depend 
upon to learn what their conclusion was. 

Q. What were those couriers to do ? 

A. They were to notify our men where 
and when to concentrate. 



Q. What was decided at Chicago ? 

A. There was a difference of opinion there 
as to the day when the programme was to 
be carried out, and the time was to be 
settled here at the meeting on Tuesday. 

Q. When did you see Bullitt next? 

A. When I was on the cars the next day 
1 saw Bullitt. He was dusty, as though he 
had been traveling. He said he had come 
in on the Bellefontaine train, and that he 
had left a note for Dodd, but had left it 
at the house of some one else. He asked 
me to go on into the front car. He said he 
had been registering his name as Charles 
Smith. We went into a car where there 
were but a few people, and he told me the 
programme was all arranged for this up- 
rising, how it was to be conducted, and all 
about it. When we got to Jeffersonville, he 
got him a buggy. On Saturday he wished 
to have A. 0. Brannan and Dr. Bayless sent 
out to him, and on Sunday Kalfus and 
Thomas, and to those four he would com- 
municate the uprising of the order. He 
said he expected to be arrested, but if he 
saw all these men, he didn't care if he was 
arrested. 

When we got to Louisville, as soon as the 
ferry boat landed, a young man came on 
board for his arrest. Young Hewitt did it. 

On Monday night I was sent back here to 
Dodd by Kalfus and Thomas, to get the 
final arrangements as soon as they were con- 
cluded on. and I was to go back and report 
to them. I came on Monday night. On 
Friday night, when we were at Dodd's house, 
he said he would send his son for Bowles to 
be here, and that he sent Mr. Harrison to 
go after some other gentlemen. Mr. Harri- 
son was to go to Lafayette for one person, 
and he pulled out his money, and gave him 
sufficient to pay his expenses. 

I went to see Dodd after I came back. 
He seemed very much excited, gritted his 
teeth, and said that he hoped they had acted 
the gentlemen, and had not searched Bullitt, 
as he had drafts on Montreal. He then went 
to work and gave me the programme. I 
think this was about the 2d of August. He 
showed and read me letters from two or 
three gentlemen. They were not signed by 
any name, but they were fully concurring 
in the mattei". He had sent them word, 
and they didn't come here. Then he told 
me what the programme was, and impressed 
upon me the importance of secrecy. He 
said if Bullitt had not been arrested, I could 
not have got the programme at alL 

He said they had abandoned the idea of 
holding the secret meetings, but would hold 
them hereafter as Democratic mass meet- 
ings, and that one was to be held at Peoria, 
III, on the 3d of August, I think. Another 
here on the loth or 16th of August, and 
that his men would be instructed to come 
here armed : that they were going to work 
to release the prisoners here, and seize the 



114 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



arsenal here, at Springfield and Chicago, 111., 
and Columbus, Ohio, on the same day, and 
to release the prisoners at Johnson's Island 
and Camp Chase, Ohio, and at Camp Doug- 
las and Eock Island, 111., and then proceed to 
Louisville, and take possession of the arsenal 
there and at Frankfort, Ky., and with the 
rebel prisoners armed they would go to 
work. Their diflerence at Chicago was 
whether they should wait until the rebel 
forces should be sent into Eastern Ken- 
tucky to co-operate with them, or to make 
their uprising now, and co-oj^erate with the 
rebel forces when Davis could send them. 

Q. What was Dodd's opinion ? 

A. Ilis idea was to go ahead on the 15th 
or 16th of August, and these letters from 
these men agreed with him. Mr. Walker 
was to be here from New York on the 
Thursday after I saw Mr. Dodd, which was 
on Tuesday. 

Q. Do you know why this insurrection 
was put off? 

A, I do not. I never saw Dodd afterward 
until I saw him here. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Tuesday, November 2, at 9 o'clock, A. M. 

Court Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
November 2, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused, and their 
counsel. 

'I'he proceedings were read and approved. 

The accused, Stephen Horsey, presented 
the following: 
To the President and Members of the Military 

Commission, now in Session : 

The undersigned, Stephen Horsey, one 
of the defendants now on trial, being with- 
out counsel, respectfully requests that the 
Hon. Thomas R. Cobb be admitted as coun- 
sel for him on this trial. 

[Signed] STEPHEN HORSEY. 

November 2, 1864. 

The examination of Felix G. Stidger, a 
witness for the Government, was then re- 
sumed as follows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

State whether in any of those conversa- 
tions with either Heffren or Bowles, they 
stated to you what this order numbered in 
the States of Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and 
Ohio. 

Answer. Heflfren told me that the organ- 
ization of the order was about complete in 
Indiana, and the number was between 
seventy-five and eighty thousand men. I 
never understood any definite number in 
Illinois or Missouri, but I understood that 
the heads of the order from those States 
pledged ffom Illinois fifty thousand to go 
to the field, and thirty thousand from Mis- 
souri. Ohio never stipulated any definite 
number, but would furnish men. 



Q. What, if any thing, was said to you 
by Heffren or Bowles, as to the extent of 
the arming of the organization, and with 
what kind of arms ? 

A. Bowles made a statement in the Coun- 
cil of the 14th of June, that the organizar 
tion in his county numbered about six hun- 
dred men, but that there was a military 
organization amounting to nine hundred 
men, armed and equipped. 

Q. Was this military organization outside 
of the order? 

A. I do not know. He said the Order of 
the Sons of Liberty numbered six hundred 
men in his county, and nine hundred men 
armed and equipped; but he did not say 
with what arms. He also stated that he 
had an arrangement with a man to furnish 
any number or kind of arms. He made 
this statement in the Grand Council of the 
14th of June, in the way of a speech. 

Q. Who was present at the time he was 
making that speech ? 

A. Mr. Dodd was present; Mr. Harrison 
and Mr. Milligan were there, and Mr. Hor- 
sey was there at one time. Mr. Bowles 
made a remark two or three times during 
the day. 

Q. Was Mr. Bingham present at that 
meeting? 

A. No, sir; not on the 14th of June that 
I saw. 

Q. Was it stated what Stnte should be 
made the battle-ground ? 

A. Kentucky and Missouri; that was 
what Bowles and Dodd told me. 

Q. What was said, if any thing, in refer- 
ence to any understanding with the Con- 
federate forces ? 

A. Bowles said they would go to Ken- 
tucky and have a regular understanding 
with the Confederates, and act in concert 
with them ; and that they had sent a man 
named Dickerson to Richmond to have the 
Confederate authorities send an invading 
force to act in concert with their order. 

Q. Was there any concert with the rebel 
forces in Kentucky or elsewhere ? 

A. There was communication between 
this order and the guerrillas in Kentucky. 
Bullitt instructed a man to try and get a 
place appointed for him to meet Colonel 
Jesse, said to be a rebel Colonel in com- 
mand of the rebel torces in Kentucky ; and 
he instructed this man to go to Colonel 
Syphert, a rebel Colonel, said to be in com- 
mand of a rebel squad, and have a confer- 
ence with him about the capture of Louis- 
ville. 

Q. Had you any conversation with Bowles 
in reference to communication with the 
rebels ? 

A. I had. Bowles at first objected to this 
uprising, until the rebels should invade the 
eastern part of the State, as he said they 
would. This man Dickerson was sent South 
to communicate with the rebel forces. 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



115 



Bowles said he would consent to the upris- 
ing on the 15th or 16th of August, as Dodd 
had said, provided Colonel Syphert, Colonel 
Jesse, and Walker Tajdor would assist in 
the capture of Louisville until the forces 
of this State could get there. 

Q. What forces of this State were refer- 
red to ? 

A. The uprising of the Sons of Liberty. 

Q. Have you any knowledge of attempts 
or efforts on the part of any members of 
this order to procure arms r If so, what 
kind ? 

A. Not directly. The question of arming 
was discussed on the 14th of June. Some 
said, tax the members of the order ; others 
contended that each district should arm 
itself; while others contended that each 
individual should arm himself, to resist the 
Government, and that to do so, they would 
dispense with the luxuries of life, to pro- 
cure money to get arms with which to re- 
sist the Government. 

Q. Had you any talk, individually, with 
Bowles, or any other member of the order, 
in reference to procuring arms ? 

A. Bowles wanted to know, the last time 
I saw him, if I knew Peters, of Cincinnati ; 
he wanted to get arms of him; and also 
B. C. Kent, of New Albany, Indiana; he 
wanted to communicate thi'ough him with 
Dr. Gordon, of New Albany, that he might 
have arms shipped to Gordon, and wagoned 
out into the country. 

Q. Have you any knowledge of any ef- 
forts to procure lances ? 

A. Di". Bowles asked me if I could have 
three or four thousand lances made; he 
wanted that number, and thought they 
could be made in Kentucky without suspi- 
cion. He wanted three or four thousand 
men armed with lances and revolvers; he 
said he could make them of great ser- 
vice. 

Q. I think you stated, did you not, that 
Bowles was present at the meeting in New 
York? 

A. He told me he was. 

Q. Did he tell what was done at the meet- 
ing in New York, on the 22d of February ? 

A . He said that Vallandigham was elected 
Supreme Commander that day ; that there 
was a change in the name of the order, that 
the ritual was changed, and- a slight change 
in the colloquy, though I do not remember 
what it was. There was a committee ap- 
pointed to make a change in the ritual, and 
after it was made, the manuscript was sent 
to Vallandigham for his revision. He re- 
vised it and made one or two additions. 
He made the addition, " Resistance to tyrants 
is obedience to God." This was said by Mr. 
Piper, by Mr. Bowles and other members of 
the order to have been made by Vallandig- 
ham. And there was an invocation at the 
end of the first degree said to have been 
added by Vallandigham, and a reference to 



a passage of Scripture, which occurs in the 
first or third degree, was also said to have 
been added by Vallandigham. 

Q. Have you any knowledge of money 
being raised or expended, to procure arms 
and organize the society? 

A. I was told by Mr. Kern, a member of 
the order, that Judge Williams, of Ken- 
tucky, had given $100, and other members 
$200 for organizing the order, and that he 
had expended that money in the purchase 
of arms, and that they had sent the men 
with the arms South. 

Q. W^here did Kern live ? 

A. In Louisville. 

Q. How do you know him to be a mem- 
ber of the order ? 

A. By having met him in Council, and 
having conversations frequently with him. 
Kalfus also told me that Bocking was fur- 
nished with money for the purpose of get- 
ting this Greek fire. 

Q. Have you known Bowles to spend 
money? 

A. He told me he had spent $2,000, for 
the benefit of the order, and would spend 
all he had, were it necessary. He did not 
say in what way he had spent the money. 

Q. Have you ever had any talk with 
Bowles with respect to the uprising, and 
when he favored its taking place? 

A. He told me he cared nothing about 
the election; he was satisfied Lincoln would 
be elected; he wanted the time spent in 
perfecting the organization and getting 
ready for the uprising. He said he would 
agree to the uprising on that day, provided 
the rebel Colonels could be got to act in 
concert with the order. 

Q. What do vou know about this Commit- 
tee of Thirteen? 

A. The question of a Committee of Thir- 
teen was discussed in the Grand Council of 
the 14th of June. They were desirous to 
have this Committee of Thirteen to carry 
on the concerns of the Grand Council during 
its recess; and it was a question whether 
they should be appointed by the Grand 
Council or by the Grand Commander, and 
known only to him. There was a Commit- 
tee of Thirteen so called, in Kentucky, but 
I understood from Kalfus it was composed 
only of seven; they were to carry on the 
business of the order during the recess. 

Q. State whether or not this organization 
appointed any men to act as spies upon the 
Government. 

A. McBride said on the 14th of June that 
he had men acting as spies in the Loyal 
League, who reported to him every thing that 
was done. Mr. Harrison also said they had 
men from outside the order, so that they 
should not act both ways, employed as spies 
and acting for the benefit of the order. 
Dodd wanted me to act in that capacity. 

Q. Have you ever met, or had consulta- 
tion with a man by the name of Hines ? 



116 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



A. No, sir. Piper told me that Hines 
was appointed on Vallandigham's staff, and 
that he was then waiting in Canada to take 
charge of the releasing of the prisoners on 
Johnson's Island, or Rock Island, and Bowles 
of the other. Hines was formerly a Captain 
in the rebel army, and made his escape from 
the Ohio State Penitentiary with John 
Morgan. 

Q. Have you any knowledge of members 
of the rebel army being initiated into this 
order ? If so, when and where ? 

A. There was arebel Colonel Anderson, of 
the 3d rebel Kentucky regiment of Infan- 
try, initiated into the order, about the last 
of June, 1864. 

Q. Who initiated him? 

A. Kalfus told me that he gave him the 
first degree, and directed me to give him 
the second and thii'd. There was also a 
Captain Van Morgan who was initiated into 
the order, and had the full confidence of the 
members of the order in Kentucky; also 
Dick Pratt and Jim McCracklin. There 
was also another who said he was a Captain 
of a squad of guerrillas. I saw him initiated 
in Kalfus' office. 

Q. Who initiated him? 

A. Either Kalfus or myself, I do not 
recollect which. Kalfus I know gave me 
an introduction to him. Kalfus I know 
initiated those other men. 

Q. Where? 

A. He told me that he did it in his office. 
I conversed with one of them afterward, 
and satisfied myself that he was a member 
of the order. 

Q. You may now give to the Court some 
of the signs, grips, passwords, and colloquies 
of the different degrees of the order. 

[The witness here replied substantially 
and in detail as on page 51.] 

[A pamphlet was here handed to the 
witness by the Judge Advocate.] 

Q. What is that ? 

A. It is the Constitution of the Supreme 
Council. I recognize it by having seen it 
frequently before, and from having been 
instructed by Dodd, Bullitt, and Harrison, 
that it was that work. 

Q. Have you ever used it in instructing 
others ? 

A No, sir. I do not know that I have. 
We only had one or two copies in our State. 
I have frequently told persons of such a 
book. 

A pamphlet entitled Constitution and 
Laws of the S. C. was then introduced in 
evidence by the Judge Advocate. [See Ap- 
pendix.] 

Also, a letter bearing date October 8, 1863. 

Also, a letter bearing date June 28, 1864. 

Q. Are there any private marks of the 
order on the letter of June 28th ? 

A. Yes, sir. There are. The letters 0. 
S. L. are written under the date, in small 
characters, and would be calculated to mis- 



lead a person who did not particularly no- 
tice them. S. C. means Supreme Com- 
mander; or it may mean Supreme Council. 
These letters make it an official letter. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I was initiated in the Vestibule degree of 
the Order of the Sons of Liberty on the 5th 
of May, 1864. I took the first degree about 
the 25th or 26th of May, 1864. I -entered 
the order as a regular member, and as a 
United States Detective, and I took the sev- 
eral degrees for the purpose of disclosing 
its secrets to the officers of the Government. 
I kept the authorities posted by reporting 
sometimes as often as twice a week. While 
a member of the order, I was engaged part 
of the time in Nelson and Bullitt, Ken- 
tucky, in extending the organization. I 
organized some county temples, and initia- 
ted probably forty or fifty members. The 
authorities knew that I was engaged in this 
work. 

Q. Then your private and ostensible pur- 
poses were different. Your private purpose 
was to commit as many as possible to the 
treasonable schemes of the order, and to 
keep the Government officials advised of it, 
and to bring them to justice at the proper 
time ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate. 

The counsel for the accused said it was 
always competent to show the character of 
the witness, his feelings, and the connection 
he has had with the transaction he details. 

The Judge Advocate replied that the 
counsel for the accused were at liberty to 
show what were the feelings and purposes 
of the witness, by inquiring as to his acts, 
but they could not inquire as to his pur- 
poses and feelings. 

The Court was cleared for deliberation. 
On being reopened, the Judge Advocate 
announced to the accused that the objection 
was sustained. 

Before the Court was cleared, the counsel 
for the accused, W. A. Bowles, Andrew 
Humphreys, Horace Heffren and Stephen 
Horsey, desired to withdraw the question. 
It was insisted on, on behalf of L. P. Milli- 
gan. 

The only instructions I gave to members 
were those I received from Judge Bullitt, 
Dr. Kalfus, Dr. Bowles, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Piper 
and other members. Piper represented 
himself as from Springfield, Illinois, and as 
having an appointment on Vallandigham's 
staff He said he had orders from Vallan- 
digham to Judge Bullitt and Dr. Bowles, 
respecting the time set for the uprising of 
the order. Judge Bullitt was Grand Com- 
mander of Kentucky. I carried messages 
from Bullitt to Kalfus and Bowles about 
the murder of Coffin. At a meeting in Dr. 
Kalfus' office, at which Bullitt, Kalfus, Pi- 
per, and Dr. Chambers, of Warsaw, Gallatin 



TREASON TRIALS AT liSTDIANAPOLIS. 



117 



countj'-, Kentucky were present; Bullitt and 
Chambers were t-ie strongest in their ex- 
pressions that Coffin should be killed, and 
no one disagreed. 

[A lengthy cross-examination on the wit- 
ness' interviews with Horace Hefiren here 
took place, but no additional facts were 
elucidated.] 

I understood from Dr. Bowles that Book- 
ing was a member of the order. Bocking 
is a foreigner. Dr. Bowles, Dr. Kalfus, 
Charley Miller, Boyd Winchester and oth- 
ers, were present when Bocking explained, 
in his room at the Louisville Hotel, Louis- 
ville, his different applications of Greek 
fire. He exhibited his shell, and drew a 
diagi'am of his hand-grenade, and explained 
it, together with his clock invention. I 
never heard of these things being brought 
to the notice and offered to the United 
States Government. Dr. Bowles said that 
the rebel Government would pay ten per 
cent for all Government property destroyed, 
taking the estimated amount from North- 
ern papers. He wished me to impress it 
upon the people of Kentucky that this was 
a fact, and the inventions of Bocking and 
the Greek fire were to be spoken of to give 
the people confidence in the order as to 
what it was to accomplish. Bocking, I 
know, had been to Canada with his inven- 
tions. Bowles, in referring to this, said, 
"We sent him to Canada to see if he was 
willing to spend his money for the benefit 
of the Order of the Sons of Liberty." 

Bowles, in making his speech before the 
Grand Council on the 14th of June, when 
the Council was getting an estimate of the 
number of men in the order that they 
could depend on, said they numbered six 
hundred in his county, and that he had an 
organization of nine hundred men armed 
and equipped. He did not state what they 
wei'e to do, or what they were armed for. 
Dodd, in the course of that meeting, said it 
was for the purpose of forming a military 
organization, and to see if the time of ac- 
tion was not near at hand. I do not know 
that there had been any military organiza- 
tion up to that time, but the object stated 
then was, to perfect a military organization; 
and to this end a Committee on Military 
Affairs was appointed to report on a plan 
for its complete military organization. 

At the June meeting of the Council there 
was a Mr. Andrew Humphreys, or Dr. 
Humphreys. He was called by both names. 
The Mr. Humphreys I refer to, resembles 
that gentleman (the witness here pointed 
to the accused), but I could not swear posi- 
tively that he is the man. Mr. Heffren's 
name was called as Deputy Grand Com- 
mander, but he was not present. I could 
not say, positively, that Humphreys was 
ever initiated into the order, unless he was 
the same that was present that day. I 
heard it said that he was a Major General. 



There were three sessions that day, the first 
from 10 to 1, another in the afternoon, 
and another after supper. Dr. or Andrew 
Humphreys was present at the morning 
and afternoon session. I do not remember 
whether he was present at the evening ses- 
sion- or not. This Humphreys sat just back 
of me, and was referred to once or twice. 

I met Bowles in the Council of the 14th 
of June, and at the meeting of members of 
the order at Booking's room at the Louis- 
ville Hotel. Horsey was at the Council of 
the 14th of June, but he came in late. 
He was asked why he was so careless as to 
initiate such men as Coffin into the order, 
which he had done. 

The murder of Coffin was discussed in open 
Council. Dr. Bowles participated in that 
discussion. There was not a dissenting 
voice with respect to the murder of Coffin 
at that or any other time. I did not know 
that Coffin contemplated being at the meet- 
ing, though I expected that he would be, 
and I started a Mr. Prentice, a Government 
Detective, to Hamilton that evening, the 
14th, to inform Coffin of his intended 
murder. I told him to tell Coffin if he 
was at Hamilton, to be on his guard, as 
there would probably be an attempt to as- 
sassinate him. Coffin did not go to Hamil- 
ton. 

I do not know with respect to this State, 
but in Kentucky, members of the order who 
were initated, were instructed in the mili- 
tary character of the ordex'. Judge Bullitt, 
Dr. Kalfus, myself, or whoever initiated 
members, always instructed them that the 
order was for the purpose of resisting the 
Government by force of arms, and for as- 
sisting the South. More or less of these 
instructions were given, according as the 
members were deemed reliable or other- 
wise. The order had a means of ascertain- 
ing the number of arms possessed by the 
members, by having returns made by the 
County Temples, in or under the guise 
of a subscription list for certain Democratic 
newspapers. For instance, a person pre- 
tending to subscribe for the Cincinnati 
Enquirer^ meant that he had a revolver ; if 
for the Chicago Times, that he had a shot 
gun ; if for the Louisville Democrat, that he 
had a rifle; and under the head of Miscel- 
laneous, would be indicated the amount of 
ammunition he had on hand. This method 
of obtaining returns was resorted to, that 
it might be kept a secret from those who 
were not acquainted with the plan. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Thursday, November 3, at 9 o'clock,A. M. 

CouBT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
November 3, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M.) 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present; also the Judgo 
Advocate, the counsel, and the accused. 



118 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



The proceedings were read and ap- 
proved. 

The cross-examination of Felix G. Stid- 
ger was then resumed as follows: 

As a detective, I was in the habit of com- 
municating the progress the order was 
making to General Carrington, Captain 
Jones, Provost Marshal, and afterward to 
Colonel Thomas B. Farley, when he occu- 
pied that post. Governor Morton I proba- 
bly met two or three times, and communica- 
ted to him what I knew. My reports to 
General Carrington were sometimes writ- 
ten and sometimes given in person. I was 
entirely free and confidential in my com- 
munications with the General, and as a gen- 
eral thing he left me entirely to my own 
discretion, as to the course I should adopt 
in my investigations. The man named 
Dickerson, referred to in my direct exam- 
ination, Bowles told me, lived in Baltimore, 
and that he went to Richmond at his 
pleasure. Bowles also told me, that he 
had received a letter from Dickerson, who 
was just home from Richmond. He wan- 
ted to know how many men Kentucky 
would give. I told him probably forty, 
fifty, or sixty thousand men; as it was a 
revolutionary State, I thought she would 
furnish that number to assist in the design 
he was speaking of, namely, revolution in 
the North and assisting the South, 

The last conversation I had with Dr. 
Bowles was about the 6th or 7th of August, 
when I was at his house with the pro- 
gramme which I got from Dodd. He re- 
marked tliat Dodd had no right to change 
the programme; that they should have 
, awaited the action of the rebel forces; 
but finally he determined that they would 
act without the co-operation of the rebels, 
if they could not get it. Bowles told me he 
had received notice of the change. That 
was the time I met Dodd's son returning 
from Bowles' house, and Bowles told me he 
had been there. 

When Milligan's name was called as a 
Major General, he made no particular re- 
sponse, and he made no objection that I 
heard; the list was called by the Grand 
Commander. The Council at Chicago, at 
which Dr. Bowles was present, was about 
the 2Uth of July. I do not know whether 
Mr. Milligau was present or not. The 
meeting at Hamilton, at which Mr. Milli- 
gan was present, was a Democratic mass 
meeting to nominate delegates to the Chi- 
cago Convention. Bowles, Dodd, Milligan 
and myself wt-nt on the same train to 
Hamilton, but I had no conversation at all 
with him. 

KE-EXAMINATION. 

At the meeting of Bowles, Kalfus and 
others at Booking's room, at the Louisville 
Hotel, Louisville, Booking explained, but 
did not exhibit, some kind of clock ma- 



chinery that could be wound up and set to 
run any specified length of time; it had a 
Greek fire attachment. This machine 
could be put into a box or trunk, and with- 
out exciting any suspicion, be left on board 
a steamer, or in a building, which would 
be set on fire at any time at which the 
clock might be set. 

The nine hundred armed men, of whom 
I have spoken, that were in Dr. Bowles' 
county, were all amenable to the officers of 
the order ; and though someof themhadonly 
been initiated into the Order of American 
Knights, they were amenable to the officers 
of the Order of the Sons of Liberty, Those 
members of the Order of American Knights 
who had only taken the first or vestibule 
degree, and were armed, were counted on 
in case of necessity. I was requested by 
Judge Bullitt, Dr. Kalfus, Mr. Thomas and 
other members of the order, to organize the 
order as fast as possible ; they furnished me 
with money to pay my traveling expenses. 
They also sent me down the Nashville Rail- 
road to learn the position of the Federal 
troops, and the number of guns on that 
Railroad at different points. 1 went down 
as far as Bowling Green. 

Colonel Warner, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows: 

Question by the Judge Advocate : 

State your name and the position you hold? 

Answer. A. J. Warner, Colonel of the 17th 
V. R. C, and Commander of the Post at In- 
dianapolis. 

Q. State to the Court where you met with 
that letter ? 

[The Judge Advocate here handed to the 
witness a letter marked Government Ex- 
hibit "N."]- 

A. This letter was taken by me among 
other papers from the office of Mr. H. H. Dodd, 
at the time the arms were seized. This 
letter was found either in the safe or desk, 
I am not certain which. 1 recognize it es- 
pecially by the signature, and some words 
which I could not make out. 

Q. In what capacity were you acting, and 
under what orders, when you seized those 
papers ? 

A. On Saturday evening, I believe about 
the 20th of August, I received information 
that a lot of arms had been shipped secretly 
to this place, and had come to the Bellefon- 
taine Depot. 1 immediately, in the absence 
of the District Commander, ordered the 
Provost Marshal of the Post to seize the 
arms, and arrest all jiarties known to be 
connected with the transaction. From the 
time I first heard of the shipment of those 
arms to the time tlie Provost Marshal 
reached the depot with wagons, etc., they 
had been removed to the old 6'e>ifiuel 
building. That night, I think, twenty-six 
boxes of arms and ammunition were taken. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



119 



Q. State what those boxes contained, and 
how they were marked ? 

A. The boxes were shipped to J. J. Par- 
sons. On the way-bill they were marked 
"Stationery," I think. On some of them 
there were marks indicating that they were 
Sunday School books, or tracts. Twenty-four 
or twenty-six boxes contained fixed ammu- 
nition for large sized revolvers ; the balance 
conta,ined large sized revolvers. They were 
self-cocking; and were the largest sized re- 
volvers I have ever seen. 

Q. What was done with those arms? 

A. They were taken possession of by me, 
and are now deposited, with the ammuni- 
tion, in the United States arsenal. 

Q. How many arms were there? 

A. Between three hundred and fifty and 
four hundred revolvers. The boxes con- 
tained mostly ammunition. 

Q. Did you find any others ? 

A. On Sunday morning I went down my- 
self to make a thorough search of the build- 
ing, and found secreted in the office or room 
occupied by H. H. Dodd, under books and 
stationery, six more boxes, making in all 
thirty-two boxes. 

Q. What did those six boxes contain ? 

A. Part of them contained arms, and part 
ammunition ; of the same description as 
those taken on Saturday night. Upon find- 
ing those arms there, I concluded to look 
further and see what papers I could find re- 
lating to them, to see what parties were im- 
plicated ; consequently a search was made 
in the desk and safe in the room occupied 
by Dodd. A search was made in other 
rooms in the building also. 

Q. State whether this instrument was 
found there? 

[A stamping press was here handed to 
the witness.] 

A. This was found in the room said to 
have been occupied by the Grand Secretary 
of the Order of the Sons of Liberty, together 
with about two bushels, or more, of rituals, 
constitutions, etc., of the order. Also, a 
roll of the members of the order in this 
city, and papers relating to the order. 
Ther^ were also blanks, note books and 
orders, some of them printed, and others 
stamped. 

Q. You may state to the Court whether 
you recognize that letter. 

[A letter bearing date May 12, 1864, was 
here handed to the witness.] 

A. This letter was also taken from the 
office of H. H. Dodd; but I do not remem- 
ber whether from his safe or desk. Part of 
the letters were found in his desk rolled up 
in bundles, and part were taken from a 
little drawer in the safe. 

[The letter was here offered in evidence 
by the Judge Advocate.*] 



* Windsor, Canada W., May 12, 1864. 
Dear Sib: Your letters. Am waiting to hear from 
you at Dayton as to time of the District Conventiou. 



Elliott Robertson, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows: 

I am a farmer, and live in Randolph 
county, Indiana. I became a member of 
the organization called the Golden Circle, 
in the spring of 1863, in Greenfork town- 
ship, Randolph county ; our place of meet- 
ing was in the woods; we met at night, and 
about fifteen or twenty persons were pres- 
ent. John D. Burkebile initiated me. There 
were between sixty and seventy-five mem- 
bers in our township; among them I re- 
member Nathan Brown, John D. Burkebile, 
Henry Robbins, Augustus Bunch, John 
Fudge, Abraham Piatt, Henry Wooden, 
Amos Cren, Francis Durvidge. Burkebile 
was Captain, Amos Cren Lieutenant, Henry 
Wooden Sergeant, and Eli Thomas In- 
spector. The Captain and Lieutenant were 
appointed by the members of the order; 
the Sergeant was appointed by the Captain. 
A week after I was initiated, I appointed a 
meeting of the order in Washington town- 
ship; a part of the members of Greenfork 
township were present ; Daniel Barnes pre- 
sided, and some four or five additional 
members were initiated. From the time I 
was initiated, to September or October, I 
mostly met with them once a week. The 
members of the order were ordered to drill; 
but I did not. One Sunday I met the Cap- 
tain, who asked me why I did not attend 
drill ; he said I should have gone, for they 
had had some good sport. About one-half 
the members were armed; revolvers were 
the principal arms. I heard from the mem- 
bers of the order that they drilled every 
week or two. So far as I learned, the ob- 
ject of the order was to oppose the Admin- 
istration in putting down the rebellion, and 
in making arbitrary arrests; this was to be 
done by force of arms; but exactly how it 
was to be done, had not been decided. The 
information I got from the Captain, was 
that the members of the township were to 
compose the company; we were to act in 
squads, under the direction of the Captain, 
in case the guerrilla mode of warfare was 
adopted. We were to take up arms and 
resist the enforcement of the draft. This, 
I understood, had been decided by the au- 
thorities here in Indianapolis. The Captain 
and Nathan Brown spoke of the State being 
divided into four military districts; and 
that a man by the name of Milligan com- 



No announcement yet. Will give you notice immedi- 
ately. 

J8®"Send for your friend here to return at once and 
work at home. Nothing to do here. So, also, says our 
mutual friend. Be ready for Dayton meeting. 

Grant has been worsted by Lee, and no mistake. It ia 
Grant who has fallen back six or eight miles, and not L., 
who has advanced from west to east. L. is not, and 
never has been, facing northward, but eastward. 

Truly, C. L. V. 

Sherman, too, has been brought to a dead stand first 
having been driven back. 



1-20 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



manded our district. I know of members 
of the order having assembled to resist ar- 
rests. Burkebile, our Captain, expected to 
be arrested, and he called a meeting of the 
members. I had notice to go to his house, 
with other members, to i^revent his arrest, 
in case it was attempted. I was at his 
house two nights; four or five others were 
there; among them Burkebile's two boys, 
Henry Bobbins, Heiwy Wooden, John 
Fudge, and John L. Mack. Some were 
armed with revolvers, and two of them with 
shot-guns. Our instructions were to resist 
the authorities, and not to let them take 
our Captain. John D. Burkebile induced 
me to join the order; he said it was an or- 
ganization for self-protection among the 
Democrats. He did not at first give me the 
name of the order. A meeting was ap- 
pointed to take place on the next Thurs- 
day, and I went and was initiated. The 
last meeting I attended was in September 
or October, 1863. About that time they 
changed their name, and were called the 
Order of American Knights. They did not 
change their plans or principles, that I 
know of; I did not take any new obligation, 
but was instructed in the change by the 
Captain. I attended one meeting of the 
American Knights in Preble county, Ohio, 
about August, 1864; the password by which 
we entered, was "Liberty." I learned of 
the change of name to the Order of Amer- 
ican Knights from the Captain. Nathan 
Brown was sent to Indianapolis in Septem- 
ber, 1863, to represent our township, and 
when he came back the change was made. 
He called a meeting, and the Captain 
wished me to go into the new order; I told 
him I would have a few days to study over 
it; he insisted, and told me it was a nice 
thing, but I would not go into it. 

The signs by which members recognized 
each other, are these: You pass the right 
hand down over the mouth and beard, with 
the fore-finger of the right hand down the 
right side of the nose. If the man you are. 
testing is a member, he will reply by taking 
the lobe of the left ear with the left hand 
between the thumb and finger, and draw it 
down. You then take a grip, and give one 
shake of the hand, with the fore-finger run- 
ning up the wrist as far as possible. They 
had some military signs, which, we were told, 
would protect us in case of battle, or being 
taken prisoner. The hands were clasped in 
front, and raised over the head, in which 
position you stood a few minutes, or till the 
sign was recognized; the answer to this 
sign being made by placing the hands, with 
the tips of the fingers resting on the shoul- 
ders. There was another sign, which con- 
sisted in writing the number thirty-three on 
a piece of paper, which, being handed to a 
member, signified that he who used it was 
in danger. 

I understood that the arms were procured 



from the authorities at Indianapolis. It 
was stated that Beck & Bros, had agreed to 
furnish arms. Kathan Brown and Burkebile 
were sent as rej^resentatives to a conven- 
tion at Indianapolis, in the latter part of 
July, 1863. The Captain, on his return, 
stated, as I undei-stood, that most of the 
States, including the rebel States, were re- 
jDresented ; and he also said that they had 
not concluded what was to be done in case 
of a draft. I entered the order in good 
faith, but I left it because I thought it 
was disloyal. I first reported the order 
to 'Squire Hough, I think, in October, 
1863. 

Henry L. Zumro, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testi- 
fied as follows: 

I reside at Markle, Huntington county, 
Indiana, and am a practicing physician; 
have resided there ten years. I became 
a member of the Order of the Sons of Lib- 
erty on the 20th of July last, at the so- 
licitation of Dr. Horton, directly through 
Mr. Hantz. Dr. Horton was said to be a 
member. I was initiated in the first de- 
gree in Isaac Decker's barn; at the same 
time there were initiated John Hantz, Isaac 
Decker, Edward Decker, Williain Decker, 
Daniel Highland, Adam Young, Edward 
Johnson, Joseph Johnson, William Lever, 
Nathan Johnson, William Hantz, and Wil- 
liam Cashman; fourteen were initiated by 
Dr. Horton. The society numbered in 
that township between forty and fifty. 
John Hantz was Grand Seignior; Isaac 
Decker, Treasurer; Joseph Johnson, 0. G. ; 
Nathan Johnson, G. D.; Daniel Highland, 
G. M.; William Decker, G. S.; Henry John- 
son, A. D.; I was Secretary. [The witness 
was unable to explain the initials.] The 
obligation I took was that of the first de- 
gree of the Order of American Knights. 
Dr. Horton told me that there were from 
eighty to one hundred thousand members 
of the order in this State. I understood 
there was a military organization connected 
with the order. We got up a constitution 
and organized a company of about forty 
members. David Lash was Captain ; Josejih 
Johnson, First Lieutenant; Henry John- 
son, Second Lieutenant ; Isaac Miller, Or- 
derly; there were none but members of 
the order in this company; it did not com- 
prise all the members of the order in that 
township; some were aged, and these we 
did not consider good fighting material ; 
but all that were considered able were in 
that company. I did not know of our com- 
pany drilling. At Bluflfton, Wells county, 
they drilled ; I went to see them drill ; 
that was in the early part of September, in 
this year ; some forty to sixty were drilling 
on the commons back of Blutt'ton. Some 
of the members of our company were 
members of the Bluti'ton company ; that is 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



121 



how I come to know that the BluSlon com- 
pany belonged to the order. 

After Dr. Horton initiated us, he told us 
that the object of the order was to subdue 
the Abolitionists, resist the draft, and to assist 
the Southern Confederacy. I heard of the 
contemplated uprising of the order, but 
learned nothing definite with regard to it. 
I attended, perhaps, ten or twelve meetings 
©f the order. After Huntington county 
was drafted, a meeting of the order was 
held, and a committee sent to Bluffton, 
and one to Huntington, to ascertain if there 
was a concert of action in regard to resist- 
ing the draft; Jacob Farling was the com- 
mittee to Bluffton, and I was appointed 
the committee to Huntington. At Hun- 
tington I saw Mr. Cummings; he could not 
tell me any thing about it, and the Sheriff 
referred me to Mr. Milligan, whom I saw 
about the 16th of September last. I was 
instructed to ascertain if there was a con- 
cert of action, and if so, what arrange- 
ments were to be made to resist the draft. 
I asked Mr. Milligan his opinion as to 
whether we had better resist or not; he 
said it was as good a time now as any to re- 
sist. I did not know that Mr. Milligan 
held any military position in the order; 
the Sheriff referred me to him because he 
was the leading man there, and he would 
know. His message I brought back to the 
order, but as there was no concert of ac- 
tion, the members felt somewhat disap- 
pointed, and took the papers of the order 
into Decker's barn yard and burnt them. 
The order was disbanded about the 17th 
of September, when we found the thing 
was a failure ; and we agreed not to meet 
any more. On the same day that I saw 
M.V. Milligan, I also saw Mr. Winters, the 
/ editor of the Huntington Democrat, who, 1 
believe, was a member of the order. I asked 
him the question that I had put to Mr. 
Milligan, and he advised resistance. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Friday, November 4, at"lO o'clock, A. M. 

Court Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
November 4, 1864, 10 o'clock, A. M. ) 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the Judge 
Advocate, the accused and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

H. L. ZuMRo, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, proceeded with his testimony as fol- 
lows : 

In my conversation with Mr. Milligan, on 
my visit to him, as a committee sent to 
Huntington, after advising resistance, he 
said, that if he was well, and in the woods, 
he could kill twenty men himself before 
he would be taken. When I asked him in 
what way we should resist, he concluded 
that we should form in companies or 
BQuads, just as we could; that ten men 



would be sufficient to start with in resist- 
ing tlie draft, and in resistance to the Ad- 
ministration. Shortly after I was arrested. 
I had a conversation with Mr. Milligan in 
reference to my own arrest; he thought it 
was a bad thing to be arrested as I had 
been, and he said if a man were to arrest 
him, he would kill him, even if he had to 
go forty miles to do it. Something was 
said in the conversation as to whether we 
should need horses in this resistance, when 
Mr. Milligan said that we should ; that we 
might find it necessary sometimes to assist 
a squad ten, fifteen, or twenty miles dis- 
tant, and should need horses to do it. 

I came to join the order from a conversa- 
tion I had in the early part of March, with 
Colonel James R. Slack, of the 47th Indiana, 
in his office; he resides in Huntington, He 
asked me if there was not a secret organiza- 
tion in our neighborhood ; I told him there 
was. He then wanted to know if I could 
not get the secrets of it ; and said they were 
not Democrats, but a set of traitors who 
would undermine the Government. He 
wished to know if I would not go into the 
matter to find out their purposes, and to aid 
in keeping down this strife. I told him 
that I could, but I did not think it would 
be prudent to do it, from the fact that my 
practice was here; and if at any time it 
should be found out that I had been opera- 
ting in favor of the Government, in all proba- 
bility they would endeavor to injure me. 
He said there was no danger at all, from 
the fact that the loyal portion of the 
Democratic party would only think the 
better of me; and that the traitors to 
this Government would go down so that 
there would not be enough left to make 
a boot black ; that was just his language. 
He afterward had a conversation with 
Colonel Schuler and Governor Morton, and 
Colonel Schuler came up and induced me 
to operate in that way. My purpose in 
joining the order was to endeavor to keep 
down any treasonable uprising. My subse- 
quent operations I reported from time to 
time to General Carrington. 

CROSS-EXAMINATIOX. 

No inducements have been held out to 
me to testify in this case. I was arrested 
by order of General Carrington, and placed 
under bonds ; but this was simply a pretense 
on the part of the authorities. After I was 
placed under arrest,- and before I reported 
at Indianapolis, I went to Mr. Milligan to 
consult him in reference to my arrest, and 
I stated to Mr. Coftroth, a counsel, when I 
met him at Peru, that I might employ Mr. 
Milligan to assist in my defense. I made 
application to be admitted a member of the 
order at Huntington at different times. ] 
joined the order at Rockcreek township. 
I was solicited by Mr. Milligan's student to 
go into the temple. 



122 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



At the time I called to see Mr. Milligan 
on the 16th of September, Mr. Joseph John- 
son went with me. Mr. Johnson was present 
during the whole of the conversation I had 
with Mr. Milligan. Mr. Johnson lives in 
Rockcreek township. He is the Joseph 
Johnson, 0. G., I referred to as being 
initiated at the time I was. Mr. Milligan 
was eick in bed, and I understood he had 
been for a considerable time under the in- 
fluence of opium and mercury, and he wished 
me to see if any eftect was being produced 
by the opium and mercury. After my con- 
versation with Milligan, I said I thought it 
worried him; he told me that it did; and I 
replied that I would then say nothing 
further. I do not think Mr. Milligan was 
at the time under the influence of narcotics, 
or opium. I next visited Mr. Day, to whom 
1 was referred by Mr. Milligan. I told Mr. 
Day that Milligan had advised resistance, 
but said that he was so sick I did not like 
to say a great deal to him. Mr. Day said it 
would be foolish to resist. I asked him as 
I had Mr. Milligan, if there was to be any 
concert of action, and if so, that we were 
ready to resist in our township. Mr. Sam- 
uel Winters and Mr. Reinbarger were pres- 
ent during my conversation with Mr. Day. 
I remember Milligan saying, when I asked 
him if they were going to resist, that they 
had no fighting men there ; that there were 
only five or six fighting men in Huntington. 
I might have spoken also, but Mr. Ibach 
and 1 also called at Mr. Coffroth's office. I 
called at Mr. Coffroth's office at the instance 
of Mr. Johnson, who wanted to know what 
was his opinion about resistance. Mr.Cof- 
froth said he was not a member of the or- 
der, and would not advise resistance in any 
way. I did not go to Mr. CoftVotli to act as 
a spy upon him, but simply because Mr. 
Johnson said he was an influential Demo- 
crat, and he would like to know his opinion. 

When Dr. Harden stated that the objects 
of the order were to oppose the Administra- 
tion, resist the draft, and assist the South- 
ern Confederacy, there were present John 
Hautz, Isaac Decker, Edward Decker, Wil- 
liam Decker, Daniel Highland, Adam 
Young, Henry Johnson, Joseph Johnson, 
Nathan Johnson, Wm.Hantz, Wm.Cushman, 
and myself. The memorandum to which I 
refer for these names, I made at the time. 

The date of the meeting at which I was 
appointed as a committee to go to Hunting- 
ton, and Jacob Farling to go to Bluft'ton, 
was on the 14th of September. Among 
those who were present at the meeting of 
the 14th of September, were Mr. Farling, 
Joseph Johnson, Mr. Eders and otliers. Mr. 
Johnson was present at my appointment, 
and agreed to go with me. David Lash, 
who was the Captain of our company, is 
the bi'other of the merchant of that name, 
and is a carpenter. Though Mr. Winters 
and Mr. Reinbarger advised resistance, and 



Mr. Miiligan said it was as good a time as any 
to resist, I reported that there would be no 
concert of action; and the consequence was 
that the papers of the order were burned. 
^Mien it came to the test, the order failed. 

My purpose in going into the order was 
not to betray its members, but to keep the 
Government posted as to their designs. 
There appeared to be a great danger of an 
outbreak and rebellion at home, and I 
thought if I could do any thing to prevent 
it, I was doing the community a kindness, 
and not injury. 

I consulted with Esq. Bratton, but he 
knew my position with reference to the 
order; it was he who arrested me and 
bi'ought me from Markle. 

I never told any one that Mr. Milligan 
could be got clear or convicted for money ; 
but a person who, I understood, was a friend 
of Mr. Milligan, wanted to know of me, if 
he could be got away from the guards. The 
idea that I held out was, that I thought he 
could be. My impression was that they 
wanted to bribe the guards, but I do not know 
from whom I got the idea. But I never 
stated to any one, that if I was furnished 
with money, I could or would use it secretly 
for the benefit of Mr. Milligan, either upon 
officers or members of the guard. 

The statement of Mr. Milligan, that if he 
was well and in the woods, he could kill 
twenty men before he was taken, and also 
the statement that ten men would be suffic- 
ient to start with, were made in the pres- 
ence of Joseph Johnson. 

The militar}' company connected with this 
order was organized perhaps three or four 
weeks before we abandoned the order, which 
was about the middle or latter end of August, 
and after the organization had been ex- 
posed in the papers at Indianapolis. The 
organization in our township was not un- 
derstood to be an independent order, but 
was connected with the order generally, 
and we were to co-operate with them in any 
outbreak or resistance to the Government. 
When I called on Mr. Milligan, I did 
know him to be a member of the order. 
1 represented to Milligan tliat I had been 
arre.sted at the instigation of Dr. Scott, who, 
I represented, had been actuated by motives 
of rivalry, so as to get me out of the 
way as a practicing phj'sician, and it was in 
this connection tliat Mr. Milligan said, if 
he had been arrested at the instigation of 
any one governed by such motives, that he 
would go forty miles to kill the man. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
at 2 o'clock, P. M. 

AFTERNOON SESSION. 

CouiiT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, I 
November 4, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. ) 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 
All tlie members present. Also, the 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



123 



Judge Advocate, the accused, and their 
counsel. 

The Judge Advocate here stated that all 
proceedings against Colonel Horace Heffren 
were withdrawn on the part of the Govern- 
ment; that he was released from arrest by 
the proper authorities, and that he would 
now appear on the stand as a witness for 
the Government. 

Horace Heffren, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then called to the stand, and 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate. 

The counsel for the accused said that 
when the accused were jointly indicted, as 
in this instance, it was not competent for 
an accused to testify either for the defense 
or prosecution, till a verdict of "not guilty" 
has been entered. 

The Judge Advocate, in reply, said: 

The Government can at any time, or at 
any stage of the proceedings, quash any set 
of charges and specifications against the 
accused, when the interests of the service 
may seem to demand it, and with that is an 
end of the case. When the Judge Advo- 
cate says to the accused, the Government 
withdraws its charges and specifications 
against you, the man is then free, without 
any proceeding pending against him. As 
to this Commission giving a verdict of ac- 
quittal, or proceeding to a finding before 
this witness can be used, let me say that 
no such rule can obtain. It makes the 
finding, and passes its sentence in any given 
case; the proceedings are then forwarded 
t;0 the Commanding General convening the 
Court, for his approval and confirmation, or 
disapproval. If it is a case in which he has 
the power to execute the sentence, it is 
then promulgated in general orders and 
made known to the accused and to the 
woi'ld. If it is a case which the Command- 
ing General has not the power to execute, 
he adds his appi'oval or disapproval, as the 
case may be, and forwards it to the proper 
authority for approval, and after being acted 
,upon by that authority, it is made known. 
In this case, for instance, the j^i'oceedings 
would probably have to go to the President 
of the United States, and be delayed per- 
haps for months. 

The very nature and constitution of a 
military court, precludes the possibility of 
the existence of any such a rule in this 
Court. 

The witness, Horace Hefiren, then testi- 
fied as follows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

Please state your name, place of resi- 
dence, and businetss. 

Answer. My name is Horace Heffren ; 
residence, Salem, Washington county, Indi- 
ana; my profession, that of an attorney; 
my office is at Salem. 

Q. How long have you resided there ? 

A. Since March, 1857. 

Q. Please state to the Court whether you 



ever joined an order called American 
Knights, or Order of Sons of Liberty; if so, 
when and where? 

A. I joined an order called American 
Knights, somewhere in the latter part of 
the year 1863, probably in November or 
Decembei'. I have no means of telling the 
precise time. I have not my diary of last 
year with me; if I had, I could tell the 
precise day. 

Q. Did you belong to any similar order, 
or one with similar intents and purposes, of 
a different name, previous to that? 

A. I did not. 

Q. Did you ever belong to the Golden 
Circle? 

A. No, sir. I belong to the Freemasons, 
but to no other secret order. 

Q. At whose solicitation did you join the 
order ? 

A. I do not know that I can say it was at 
the solicitation of any person. Mr. Bailey, 
of Terre Haute, came to Salem; I knew his 
face and recognized him, but could not call 
his name; he told me what his business 
was, and I got twelve more men beside 
myself, and we were taken into the Order 
of American Knights in my ofl&ce. 

Q. Who initiated you? 

A. Mr. Bailey. 

Q. Where does he reside now? 

A. I understand he is dead ; I have made 
inquiries since I have been in prison, and 
that is what I am told. 

Q. Who else were initiated at that time? 

A. James B. Wilson, William C. McCoskey, 
Townsend Cutshaw, Deloss Heffren, Eli 
Bouser, William P. Green, and John B. 
Pitts, I think — I am not certain about him; 
these are as far as I recollect now. 

Q. What was the first lodge or county 
temple you attended after your initiation? 

A. In order to make my story connected, 
I must explain. After we had taken the 
three degrees, I was elected Grand Seignior 
of the County Temple, James B. Wilson 
Ancient Brother, W. C. McCoskey as Secre- 
tary, and Townsend Cutshaw as Treasurer. 
The lodge was in my office, in the town of 
Salem. 

Q. When did you take the first, second 
and third degrees ? 

A. I took the three degrees that very 
night. 

Q. When did you next attend a county 
temple ? 

A. There never was but one county tem- 
ple after that, in our county, to my knowl- 
edge; and that was for the election after 
mj' time was up, and that was not far from 
the 22d of February, 1864. I was instructed 
that there was to be a meeting on the 16th 
and 17th of February, and that, as Grand 
Seignior, I was the delegate from the county 
temple. I came here and attended the 
meetings of the 16th and 17th; when there, 
I was instructed that there was to be a new 



124 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



election of officers for the ensuing year, and 
we elected officers, probably, a week from 
that time, when Garrett W. Logan was 
elected Grand Seignior in my place. 

Q. Had you attended any meeting pre- 
vious to the 16th and 17th of February? 

A. That was the first and only one of the 
Grand Council. 

Q. How did you come to that meeting? 

A. As delegate from the county tem- 
ple. 

Q. Who presided ? 

A. H. H. Dodd. 

Q. Who was Secretary? 

A. Mr. Harrison, who was a witness here. 

Q. Did you meet any of the accused at 
that meeting ? 

A. I met Dr. Bowles there, and Mr. Mil- 
ligan, I think, the second day; I did not 
see Mr. Humphreys; never met that gen- 
tleman any-where as a member of the Or- 
der of American Knights ; 1 never met him 
except as a Freemason. I never saw Mr. 
Horsey till I came into Court, and he was 
required to plead the same time as I was. 

Q. At that meeting on the 16th and 17th 
of February, you say you met Dr. Bowles 
and Mr. Milligan ? 

A. Yes, sir; Mr. Milligan on the second 
day, I believe. 

Q. Give to the Court the business trans- 
acted, and what you learned was transacted 
at those meetings on the 16th and 17th of 
February. 

A. The Grand Master read an address ; 
certain committees were appointed — one, I 
think, upon a newspaper to disseminate the 
views of the organization, and educate the 
Democratic mind up to what was thought 
it ought to be; a Committee upon Litera- 
ture was appointed ; and a committee to see 
whether a person by the name of Michael 
Malott had been divulging the secrets of 
the organization. 

Q. Who constituted those committees? 

A. I could not tell. 

Q. Were you on any committee ? 

A. I was, sir. 

Q. On what? 

A. To ferret out whether Mr. Malott had 
been revealing the secrets of the order. 

Q. What did you do in pursuance of that? 

A. We called tlie committee together; 
brought Malott before us, and a person 
whose name 1 do not remember. We in- 
vestigated all we could. Mr. McBride, of 
Evan.sville, was one of the committee; the 
others I do not remember. It was mere 
rumor and hearsay; and 1 told the commit- 
tee that I professed to know something in 
regard to law, and 1 did not think that the 
evidence was such that we could report to 
the Grand Council that the man was guilty, 
and I recommended that we report that 
tlie man was not guilty of revealing the 
secrets. 

Q. What was the penalty in case he 



did reveal them? What did the rules of 
the order enjoin as to the obligation ? 

A. I took some obligations, but do not 
know what they were ? 

Q. Do you not know what the penalties 
are for revealing the secrets of the order? 

A. I understand the penalty from what 
1 have read, and what I knew at the time 
and have learned since, to be death, figura- 
tively speaking. 

Q. What do you mean by that ? 

A. The same as in other organizations. 

Q. Was it a figure of speech, or was it to 
be carried out as fact ? 

A. That I can not answer. 

Q. Did you hear any consultation at that 
meeting, in reference to a man by the 
name of Coffin ? 

A. 1 do not think that I did ; I do not 
recollect any person mentioning his name. 

Q. Were you at the meeting of the 14th 
of June? 

A. I was not. 

Q. Were not the Military Committee 
appointed on the 16th and 17th of Febru- 
ary ? 

A. No, sir: they were not appointed in 
Council as 1 understood. 

Q. Were any military appointments or 
elections made ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What were they ? 

A. Grand Commander, Deputy Grand 
Commander, and Major Generals for the 
four divisions of the State of Indiana, a 
Secretary, and I think Treasurer. Mr 
Dodd was elected Grand Commander; I 
was elected Deputy Grand Commander; 
Mr. Milligan was elected Major General of 
his district. 

Q. Was Mr. Milligan present at his elec- 
tion? 

A. I can not say that Jie was present till 
the second day, and the election of Major 
(ienerals took place on the first day I be- 
lieve. Mr. Humphreys was elected in his 
district. He was not present either day. 
Major McGrane, of Harrison county, was 
elected in my district as Major General, and 
Colonel John C. Walker was elected for the 
North-west district. The State was divided 
into four divisions. I do not know exactly 
how the lines run; but it was divided by 
counties. Dr. Bowles lived in Orange coun- 
ty, and the line ran between Washington 
and Orange counties. Major McGrane lived 
immediately south of Washington. He 
and I roomed together, and we had a great 
deal of talk, and he told me he would have 
nothing to do with it. The next morning 
Orange county was added to the south- 
eastern division, in which Dr. Bowles was. 
Major McGrane declined, and Dr. Bowles 
was unanimously elected in the place of 
McGrane. 

Q. What other business of importance 
took place at either of these meetings ? 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



125 



A. The next thing I recollect was reports 
from some committees about literature, 
and I think a university; but I did not 
pay any attention to it. My impression 
is that we laid the matter on the table. 
I VMS on the committee with respect to the 
n<.^\ -paper; and I think Mr. Bingham was 
on that committee with me; and we de- 
cided that it was all a humbug, and we would 
have nothing to do with it, but recom- 
mended an indefinite postponement with 
regard to the newspaper. Matters in regard 
to the progress of the order were also talked 
of, and reports were called for. 

Q. What was said to be the strength of 
the order at that time ? 

A. I do not know what the strength of 
the order was. 

Q. Was any thing said about the aggre- 
gate number of the order at that time? 

A. I think the Secretary reported that 
he had not received returns from several 
counties, so that the correct number could 
not be ascertained. 

Q. Of what political faith were the ma- 
jority of the men comprising that organi- 
zation? 

A. They were all Democrats. 

Q. State whether any other class of men 
were admitted, or was it a sitie qua non that 
a man must be a Democrat? 

A. I do not think any one would have 
got in unless he professed to be a Demo- 
crat. 

Q. State to the Court what were the gen- 
eral purposes and objects of that order, 
so far as you learned. 

A. In the first place, I understood there 
were two organizations, one within the 
other ; the civil organization, to which the 
mass of the members belong, and which, as 
far as I ever knew, was purely political, to 
bring out the Democratic vote to the polls, 
and to insure the success of the principles 
of the Democratic party, by every means 
in our power to get every voter out to cast 
his vote; and as we had been told by those 
who instructed us, that it was the deliber- 
ate design and arrangement of the Aboli- 
tion party to prevent voting, we determined 
to have a free fight or a fair election. I 
have been told by members of the order 
that the other portion of the organization 
had for its object the separating of the 
States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, 
and Kentucky, from the Eastern States, to 
make a North-western Confederacy; and 
failing in that, join our fortunes with the 
South. That was the military part of it, 
which was not communicated or known to 
the members of the civil organization; 
and I presume I never would have known 
it, had it not been for the position I held as 
Deputy Grand Commander. 

Q. What proportion of the members be- 
longed to the military portion of the organ- 
ization? 



A. Only the leaders; they were to control 
the matter through a Committee of Thir- 
teen, who were to be known only to the 
Grand Commander and themselves. They 
were t-o so control us as to bring us into 
their trap. That was why I said it was a 
humbug, and said I would have nothing to 
do with it. 

Q. Have any of the schemes of the order 
come to your knowledge since then? 

A. Yes, sir. The schemes of a few of the 
leaders of this military part of the order, 
and the schemes of these were unknown to 
the great mass of the order. 

Q. Do you say that it was to these mili- 
tary leaders alone this was confined? 

A. Yes, sir; I think so. 

Q. Was Dodd considered a military 
leader? 

A. He was; but there was a man over 
him. 

Q. Who was that ? 

A. It was Dr. Bowles. 

Q. Please to explain that ? 

A. The State was divided off into Mili- 
tary Departments, and there was an officer 
of the Military Department, who was Su- 
preme Commander to the Grand Com- 
mander of the Civil Department, who had 
his Adjutant, Staft', etc. He controlled the 
Military. Department, and saw to the arm- 
ing, ammunition, and the procuring of 
funds. 

Q. Then the civil was subservient to the 
military ? 

A. Yes, sir; and knew nothing except 
the few who were in the confidence of the 
military. 

Q. Did you learn who was on the stafi" of 
this military leader. Dr. Bowles? 

A. Yes, sir; it is James B. Wilson; he 
told m-e so himself 

Q. What is tlie position he held ? 

A. He told me he was Adjutant General 
on Di'. Bowles' Staff. In fact, nearly all the 
information I ever received, except what I 
received on the 16th and 17th of February, 
I received from Mr. Wilson, after his re- 
turn from Dr. Bowles' at French Lick 
Springs, Orange county. 

Q. What did you learn in reference to the 
arming of this order? 

A. I never understood that the men of 
the rank and file of the civil organization 
were to be armed, that is, at the expense 
of the order. 

Q. How were they to arm ? 

A. They were to do it among them- 
selves? 

Q. Who was it that was to be armed by 
the order ? 

A. These men who were to be under the 
control of the Commanding General, that 
is tlie Military Commander. 

Q. How did they make the division as to 
who were to be armed by the order, and 
who were to arm themselves? 



126 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



A. There were certain men they selected 
to whom to communicate that which it 
would not do to communicate to every 
body. 

Q. Did they go into a township, for in- 
stance, and pick out the men that were to 
be armed by the order ? 

A. I think not, sir. 

Q. Then how could they tell whom they 
were to arm, and whom they could rely 
upon to arm themselves ? 

A. I do not know. They had a way of 
ascertaining the number of arms of differ- 
ent kinds that the members of the order 
had; they would take a sheet of paper and 
rule it in columns, as for keeping a tally, 
heading each column with apples, corn, 
beans, or any thing you please, so that you 
could understand what these things were 
intended for. Apples might stand for rifles; 
corn for shot-guns; beans for pistols, and 
potatoes for ammunition, and any thing else 
for lead. This sheet would be a report of the 
number of arms found by those making 
the return. 

Q. Was there any agreement between 
the members of the order, as to how it 
should be understood by those to whom 
the report was made? 

A. Sly instructions were to report by the 
secret cypher how many there were. Each 
township temple reported to the Secretary 
of the mother temple how many arms and 
how much ammunition they had, and then 
that Secretary reported to the Grand Secre- 
tary of the State Council. 

Q. Do you know of any attempts on the 
part of the members of this order to arm 
the order? 

A. I only know that from hearsay, from 
members of the order. I only know what 
Mr. Wilson told me. 

Q. Was Mr. Wilson a member of the or- 
der? 

A. Yes, sir; he was initiated when I was. 

Q. What did he state to you? 

A. He had been to French Lick Springs, 
to Dr. Bowles. When he came back from 
there, myself, and I think Townsend Cut- 
shaw, a man by the name of Purlee, and my 
impression is that Mr. C. McCoskey also, 
were sitting or standing at the Clerk's 
oflBce door. The people in that country 
were at fever heat, anxious and unquiet, 
with rumors of this, that and the other; 
and the matter came up in that conversa- 
tion, in regard to resisting the draft, when 
Mr. Wilson pulled a roll out of his pocket, 
wrapped up like a banker's parcel, and said 
there was one thou.sand dollars he had just 
got from Dr. Bowles, to procure arms and 
ammunition for our county, and there was 
plenty more where that came from. 

Q. Did he state any thing else? 

A. Not at that time, but he did after- 
ward. 

Q. What was that? 



A. That there was a half a million of 
dollars sent to Indiana, Illinois and Ken- 
tucky, I think, by rebel agents in ("anada, 
for the purpose of procuring arms and am- 
munition for these North-western States, to 
arm themselves with. 

Q. Who received this money in this State? 

A. Mr. Dodd, I was told, and Mr. John C. 
Walker. 

Q. By whom were you told ? 

A. By Dr. Wilson. I never got a word 
from Mr. Bowles, Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Milli- 
gan or Mr. Horsey, in my life as to the 
money. 

Q. What amount did they receive ? 

A. A hundred thousand dollars each. 

Q. How was it to be expended ? 

A. A portion of it was to go to Dr. Bowles, 
to be spent in his part of the State in pur- 
chasing arms and ammunition. 

Q. For whom? 

A. For the military order that had its 
connection with the Order of American 
Knights. 

Q. When did you have this conversation 
with Dr. Wilson ? 

A. It could not have been far from the 
middle of June, 1864. I think so from the 
fact that T was told a Grand Council was 
to be held here about that time, and it 
was shortly after that, that he and I had 
this conversation. It must have been in 
June. 

Q. Did he get that information at that 
meeting ? 

A. I am not certain that he came to In- 
dianapolis, but it was shortly after that 
meeting that he told me. Whether he 
went to the meeting, or got it from Dr. 
Bowles, I can not say. 

Q. Did you learn from him, or other mem- 
bers of the order, for what purpose those 
arms were to be used after they were pur- 
chased and distributed to the members of 
the Order of American Knights? 

A. I never heard how they were to be 
distributed, neither do I know to whom 
they were to be distributed ; but I supposed, 
as a matter of course, they were to be dis- 
tributed to members of the order, and were 
to be used either to defend themselves from 
oppression and wrong, or to fight any thing 
that came to fight them. 

Q. Were, or were not these arms to be 
used in carrying out the purposes of the 
order that you have detailed ? 

A. I understood they were to be used for 
the purpose of carrying out the military 
part of the organization of the American 
Knights. 

Q. Do you know when the order was 
changed ? 

A. I presume it was changed before June. 

Q. Before you had this conversation with 
Dr. Wilson ? 

A. I think it was. 

Q. Do I understand you to say that the 



TKEASON TKIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



127 



I 



object of the military part of this order was 
to establish a North-western Confederacy in 
conjunction with the Southern Confederacy? 

A. I understood the object to be to sepa- 
rate themselves from the Eastern States, and 
form a Confederacy of themselves ; or else, 
failing to do that, join their fortunes to the 
Southern Confederacy. 

Q. Then were, or were not those arms to 
be used in carrying out these objects of the 
military organization ? 

A. That was my understanding. 

Q. Did you ever see more than this one 
thousand dollars that you saw with Mr. 
Wilson ? 

A. I iiever did. 

Q. Did you learn of any arms being bought 
by hini ? 

A. He and I had very little talk for three 
months past; but I never heard of his offer- 
ing to buy an arm or ammunition. I never 
learned from any body that he did. I was 
asked what he did with the money, but I 
did not know. 

Q. Were these military objects of the or- 
der discussed either individually or publicly, 
at the meetings of the 16th and 17th of 
February ? 

A. The matter was talked of by some of 
us, perhaps a few of us in a corner, or off to 
one side. 

Q. Did you at that time ever talk with 
Mr. Milligan or Mr. Bowles upon that sub- 
ject? 

A. Mr. Bowles was probably there one 
morning when we were talking about it. I 
remember there was something about his 
papers, about his being a major general, 
that did not suit him; and I know we had 
talks among ourselves, probably five or six 
of us at a time. 

Q. Did there ever come to your knowl- 
edge, at any time, any intention on the part 
of this order to take possession of the State 
Government ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Detail to the Court what you learned 
in reference to that. 

A. This I also received from the same 
source — Dr. Wilson. He told me that upon 
a certain day, the 16th, but whether of 
August or July I am not certain, of this 
year, there was to have been an uprising ; 
the prisoners were to be released at the 
camp near Chicago — I think Camp Douglas — 
at Camp Morton, and a camp near Colum- 
bus, Ohio, Camp Chase it is called, I believe. 
The arsenals of the United States were to be 
seized, and the prisoners armed with the 
arms and equipments contained therein. 

Q. What then was to be done ? 

A. Governor Morton was to be taken care 
of 

Q. What do you mean by being taken 
care of? 

A. He was to be held as a hostage for 
those who might be taken prisoners, and 



engaged in the uprising. Dr. Athon was to 
be Governor, under the law of the State of 
Indiana, passed a few sessions since ; in case 
of the Governor failing to serve, he would 
be Governor; we should call- out the militia, 
and have every thing our own way. 

Q. In case you failed to capture Governor 
Morton, what then ? 

A. In case he was not captured and made 
hostage, he was to be made away with in 
some way, but I ne-\-x?r was told how. 

Q. After the arsenals were seized, the 
rebel prisoners armed, and the members of 
the order armed, what then was to be done 
by the members of the order ? 

A. I did not understand that all the mem- 
bers of the order were to take part ; it was 
the military part, and as many as could be 
induced by excitement or any means, or be 
drawn into it through the influence of the 
military leaders. Then the State Govern- 
ment was to go ahead, with the law and 
Constitution as we had it, excejjt that Dr. 
Athon was to replace Governor Morton. 

Q. Was this scheme known or imparted 
to any but members of the order ? 

A. Not that I ever knew of 

Q. State whether or not leading Demo- 
crats of the State were given this scheme ? 

A. It was given only to members of the 
order; I never knew of its being commu- 
nicated to any Democrat unless he was a 
member of the order, and I think it was 
not. 

Q. Did a man by the name of John Bow-, 
man, of Washington county, belong to this 
order? 

A. I never met him, but I understood he 
was a member. There were very few Demo- 
crats in our county (Washington) but what 
were members. I think Mr. Bowman knew 
nothing about the military part; at least 
not to my knowledge. 

Q. Did you learn what was done at the 
meeting in New York on the 22d of Feb- 
ruary? 

A. Nothing except that the ritual v^as 
changed. I am not certain wheth(-r that 
was in New York or Chicago. 

Q. Do you know who this Council of Six- 
teen were? 

A. I do not know of such .a Council; 
never heard of it till I was arrested. 1 have 
some indirect knowledge of a Council of 
Thirteen. 

Q. Was Dr. Wilson at that meeting in 
Chicago ? 

A. 1 can not state. 

Q. Did he tell you whether he was or 
not? 

A. I am not positive; I do not think he 
did. 

Q. You say you did have some indirect 
knowledge of the Committee of Thirteen? 
What was it? 

A. I understood there was such a Com- 
mittee •, that it was appointed by the Grand 



128 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Commander, and known only to him and 
the members themselves. 

Q. Did you ever hear of the appointment 
of a Committee of Ten ? 

A. The Committee of Ten that I think 
you refer to was not a Committee. They 
were individuals selected, as my under- 
standing was, to take care of Governor 
Morton. 

Q. Did you learn who they were ? 

A. I did not. 

Q. What do you mean by taking care of 
Governor Morton? 

A. To hold him as a hostage, or in case 
he could not be held, whether he was to be 
killed or not, I did not hear; but he was to 
be put out of the way by some means. 

Q. They were to dispose of him and get 
him out of the way; how ? 

A. I can not say ; but they were to get rid 
of hiiu in some way if he was not held as a 
hot" cage ? 

Cyrus L. Dunham, one of the counsel for 
the accused, here said : 

There are peculiar circumstances attend- 
ing what has taken place this afternoon, 
and I regard it as my duty to make a state- 
ment which I ask to be put upon the rec- 
ords of this Court. My relations to all 
parties here are well known to this Com- 
mission. I have not only been counsel for 
Mr. HeflFren, but as the records show, I am 
counsel for other defendants. It places me 
in rather a queer position before them, and 
perhaps before this Court ; and I desire to 
make this statement, which I have put in 
writing, and which I ask to have put upon 
the records : 

Indianapolis, November 4, 1864. 
May it please the Court : 

Being counsel for Mr. Heffren, and also 
for other defendants on this trial, I deem it 
di.e to those other defendants, and to my 
own professional and personal honor, most 
solemnly to state to this Commission, and 
in the presence of those other defendants, 
that I had no knowledge or intimation that 
the prosecution against said Heffren was to 
be abandoned, and that he was- to be put 
on the stand as a witness, until, in open 
Court, he was called to the stand by the 
Judge Advocate; that I was in no wise, or 
by any person, consulted in regard to it; 
that I never, directly or indirectly, sought, 
or even entertained the idea of the bring- 
ing about of such a result. 

[Signed] CYRUS L. DUNHAM. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Thursday, November 10, at 2 o'clock, 
P. M. 

CouET Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1 
November 10, 18G4, 2 o'clock, P. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present, except Colonel 
Reuben Williams and Colonel Benjamin 



Spooner. Also, the Judge Advocate, the 
accused, and their counsel. 

The proceedings of Friday, November 4, 
were read and approved. 

Reuben Dailey was then sworn by the 
Judge Advocate, as Assistant Recorder, in 
presence of the accused. 

The examination of Horace Heffren, a 
witness for the Government, was then pro- 
ceeded with as follows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate : 

Did you not state that Dr.. James B. Wil- 
son was Adjutant General on Dr. Bowles' 
staff? 

Answer. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know of any other staff of- 
ficer ? 

A. Yes, sir ; Garrett W. Logan was Quar- 
termaster. 

Q. Where did he reside? 

A. In Salem, Monroe township, Washing- 
ton county, Indiana. 

Q. How do you know that? 

A. David D. Hamilton and Garrett W. 
Logan went to see Colonel Bowles some- 
time during the past summer or spring. 
Hamilton was a member of the organiza- 
tion, so was Logan, who is now the Grand 
Seignior of Washington county; he was 
elected sometime in February. Mr. Ham- 
ilton told me what Logan was going for; but 
I had no confidence in him, and I wrote a 
letter to Dr. Bowles telling him not to trust 
him, that he would betray him. When 
Hamilton came back he said that Dr. Bowles 
had offered him a Brigadier Generalship, 
and he would not accept of it, and Bowles 
said their business was at an end, and Lo- 
gan was appointed Quartermaster; Logan 
told me so himself; and the reason was, 
that he had a sore leg, and would have the 
advantage of riding on horseback instead 
of going afoot. To my positive knowledge 
he has had a sore leg for seven or eight 
years. 

Q. Were there any other staff officers 
except Dr. AVilson and Mr. Logan ? 

A. Not that I know of 

Q. State whether you have any knowl- 
edge of a regiment of lancers being organ- 
ized, or of any provision being made to fur- 
nish the members of the order with lances. 

A. I have not of a regiment, but of com- 
panies composing a regiment. The first I 
knew of it was from Dr. Wilson telling me 
that Bowles had made an arrangement to 
have nine companies of infantry, one of 
lancers, and one section of artillery, to com- 
prise each regiment in this order. The 
lancers were to be armed with lances, of 
what length I do not know, but there was 
to be a hook, somewhat after the fashion of 
a sickle; the lance to punch with, and a 
sickle to cut the horse's bridle; tliere was 
to be a thrust and a cut, a thrust for the 
man and a cut for the horses' bridles; he 
thought the enemy would become confused 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



129 



and distracted, and if a charge was made 
upon them when they hac no means of 
controlling the horses, they would be easily 
mashed up. 

Q. Were any steps taken toward procur- 
ing those lances? 

A. I do not know that ever a lance was 
made, or contracted to be made ; 1 only 
know that Dr. Wilson told tne that arrange- 
ments were on foot to g.et them, but he did 
not say where, or by whom, or when they 
were to be furnished. He said they would 
be a terrible weapon in a tight. I thought 
he did not know as much about it as I did, 
or he would not try it. 

Q. Give to the Court the secret cypher 
used by the order, as far as you have knowl- 
edge of it. 

A. If I wanted to write to the Judge Ad- 
vocate, he and I would understand what 
book we would have to write from; it 
might be Dellart's Military Law, the Bible, 
or a hymn book, it would not matter what, 
so that we understood what book was re- 
ferred to. I would make my date, and 
place under it in paieu thesis the figures 
denoting the page, and the figure at the left 
end of the line would designate the line on 
which I commenced ; for instance, if it was 
the figure fifteen, it would indicate the fif- 
teenth line from the top. The page of the 
book would be placed on the right hand 
side, in parenthesis ; and the number of the 
line on the left. When I could not find 
the letter 1 wanted on any line in that 
page, then I left a line in blank and put 
another number, which was to designate 
the page to which I wanted to refer in pa- 
renthesis in that blank line, and then pro- 
ceeded as before. If 1 wished to write, "I 
do not want them," I would count the let- 
ters in the designated line, counting from 
the left, and put down for "I " the number 
three ("3"), if that is the third letter, and 
" 13 " for " d," if that is the thirteenth letter 
in line, etc. 

Q. You were appointed as delegate to 
Chicago, were you not? 

A. I was told by Mr. Dodd, that, by vir- 
tue of my otlice as Deputy Grand Com- 
mander, I was a delegate to Chicago; but 
I did not go. William P. Green, of Salem, 
ln<iiana, was started in my place. This 
must have been about the 17th or 18th of 
June, 1864; it might have been a few days 
before or after. 

Q. Then it was not the July meeting he 
attended, was it? 

A. 1 can not state positively. 

Q. Did you learn from him whether he 
had been there? 

A. He went there; he had my proxy; 
and I saw him after his return. 

Q. Did he state to you what was done? 

A. He told me, and others in my pres- 
ence, that he had been there, and made a 
report of what was done; but I was afi-aid 
9 



that he was not telling the truth, and so 
were some others, Mr. Cutshaw, Dr. Wilson, 
Mr. McCoskey, and also Mr. Bowser. I 
sent my brother to Mr. Dodd, at Indianapo- 
lis, to see whether what he stated was true, 
and we found that he had fallen in the 
hands of the detectives, that they had got my 
proxy, and that he did not get into the Grand 
Council at all; he made a bad failure of it. 

Q. Did you learn the names of the men 
comprising this Committee of Ten, who were 
to take care of Governor Morton ? 

A. No, sir; I never did; they were to be 
selected by the Committee of Thirteen, 
and were only known to the Grand Coun- 
cil, and to the members of this Committee 
of Thirteen. Mr. Harris told me he knew 
more about the order than I did. 

Q. Did I understand you to say the Com- 
mittee of Thirteen selected the Committee 
of Ten ? 

A. Yes, sir; they were to hold Governor 
Morton as a hostage for those that were 
taken prisoners, or to make away with him 
some way, but they never told me how. 

Q. State whether or not there was any 
arrangement, or instructions given, by 
which ttc property of members of this or- 
der was U) be saved in case of invasion by 
the rebels? 

A. There was, sir; there was a flag that 
was to be the emblem; it was to be a white 
flag placed upon a flag staflt', with a red 
ribbon running along the flag where it was 
tacked on to the staff" down each side of the 
staff', and three or four inches below, making 
red, white, and red ; the flag was to be hung 
out at the house or stable, or any-where else, 
and that property would be saved or pro- 
tected. 

Q. When was this to be used? 

A. Whenever there was a rebel invasion 
or raid. 

Q. Was this knowledge imparted to any 
but members of the order ? 

A. No, sir. 1 told it to no one except to 
nay father. 

Q. When did you expect this raid? 

A. About the 16th of August. Dr. Bowles 
had sent a man to see General Price, but 
he had not returned. 

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Michael C. 
Kerr is a member of this order or not? 

A. He was ; I initiated him in New Albany, 
Indiana, at i harness shop on the right 
hand side of iLain street, as you go east, I 
believe at Mr. Graff"s. 

Q. How many degrees did he take? 

A. I was only there two nights, but I 
took him through; I recollect that 1 gave 
him all three the same night. 

Q. Do you know the cause of the failure 
of the insurrection contemplated here on 
the 16th of August last? if so, give it to 
the Court. 

A. I know one reason of it, I presume; 
Mr. Kerr, I am told by members of the 



130 



TREASON TRIALS AT EN'DIANAPOLIS. 



order, received word what was to be done, 
and he came to Indianapolis and reported 
to the authorities here, Mr. Athon, Mr. 
Eistine, McDonald and others, and did 
what he could to prevent it. 

Q. Do you know any other reason? 

A. Yes, sir; because the army of the 
Confederacy did not come up through Cum- 
berland Gap as they had agreed to do, or as 
it was reported they had agreed to do. 

Q. "Was there, or was there not, any com- 
munication with General Price, in Missouri f 

A. There was, sir. 

Q. Who told you they had communica- 
tion with General Price? 

A. Dr. Wilson said Dr. Bowles' man had 
gone to see Price, and another had gone to 
Eichmond to arrange for troops to come 
through Cumberland Gap, and when they 
returned, they thought it would be before 
the 16 th of August 1864, about whion time 
the rumpus would take place. 

Q. Did they fail to communicate with the 
Confederate forces, and if so, did that have 
any thing to do with the failure of the in- 
surrection ? 

A. I understood these men fa:)ed to get 
back in time. 

Q. Did that have any thing to do with 
the failure? 

A. I do not know; I was not in their se- 
crets at that time. 

Q. Did you learn from any members of 
the order whether they had any communi- 
cation ? 

A. I believe I did, sir; from Mr. Harris. 

Q. What did he say? 

A, He said that the Richmond man got 
on his way, but we never heard from the 
messenger. 

Q. What do you mean by the Richmond 
man ? 

A. The man that went to communicate 
with the rebels at Richmond. 

Q. Did you hear any thing with respect 
to the man that went to communicate with 
Price? 

A. No, sir; I never learned his name, and 
do not know whether he communicated 
with Price or not; there was a man who 
had been communicating with rebel offi- 
cials, but I do not know what or who they 
were, for about March or April some of the 
members said I would not do to tie to. 

Q. Do you know of any tax being levied 
upon the members of the order? and for 
what "purpose? 

A. Yes, sir; it was to be twenty cents per 
month ; one dollar for the first degree, one 
dollar and a half for the second degree, 
and two and a half for the third degree, 
which was to go into the trea8ui*y. 

Q. How was that money to be expended? 

A. I do not know that? 

Q. Do you know of any direct tax being 
levied upon members of the order, and do 
you know how it was expended? 



i». it was spent for arms and ammum- 
t.on for the military part of the order; I 
presume that the large mass of them did 
not know how it was to be expended, or 
what they were paying taxes for; it was 
said to be for establishing a university and 
starting a newspaper, but the real purpose 
was for the purchase of arms and ammuni 
tion. 

Mr. Kerr received some information from 
a gentleman at Salem, and set himself to 
work to find out in regard to the whole 
thing, and by some means, I know not how, 
obtained, I am told, the information that 
a meeting was held here by the Republican 
party, and that the arrangement was made 
to fix up things to secure the election, and 
that I had sold out Washington county to 
the Republicans, and was to receive there- 
for the sum of ten thousand dollars; and 
Mr. Kerr, as I am told, sent a runner with 
a letter to Dr. Wilson for the committee to 
come at once to New Albany, Indiana. The 
committee consisted of James B. Wilson, 
John L. Menaugh, and Dr. Painter; they 
went there, and had their consultation; 
what it was I do not know, for since re- 
turning home, I have not staid at home a 
night, for I have been threatened to be 
hung since testifying. 

Q. Do you know by whom these threata 
were made? 

A. I do not wish to state that at present, 
unless you desire it particularly. 

Q. For what reason ? 

A. For my own safety. I have not staid 
at home a night since I last testified on 
Friday last. 

Q. Do you know either by report, or from 
any members of the order, where any arms 
or ammunition of this order are stored? 

A. As a man of a little honor left, at least, 
I do not think that question should be asked, 
for I do not think I ought to state what 
was said to me when I was in prison with 
other men. 

Objection waived on the part of all the 
accused. 

I know what Mr. Horsey told me and Mr. 
Humphreys ; he told where he hid his buck- 
shot, caps and powder ; some of it was hid 
in a manger under the horses' feed, and in 
a barrel the caps were hid ; other portions 
were hid in a stable and upon the plates in 
the corncrib; ShirklifFe carried oflfmuch of 
it ; and the powder was hid in barrels in his 
house. 

Q. When did he tell you this? 

A. When I was in prison with him; four 
hundred pounds of lead are hid in different 
places, some of it left with a man by the 
name of Baker, and a man he called Miller 
helped to pack some of the powder across 
the river. Shirkliffe has since been drafted, 
and is now in the army; he told where the 
money came from that they got it with; 
from Dr. Bowles. 



TREASON THIALS AT IITDIANAPOLIS. 



131 



Q, IMd you learn what quantity of ammu- 
nition was hid ? 

A. There were four hundred pounds of 
lead and several thousand musket caps; I 
think some six or seven kegs of powder. 
Both Mr. Humphreys and myself wanted 
Mr. Horsey taken from our cell ; wo did not 
wish to be associated with him, and we had 
even written a letter to Colonel Warner, 
which Mr. Humphreys and myself signed, 
requesting a change. 

CROSS-EXAmXATION. 

Question by the accused: 

When do you say you joined this order ? 

Ajiswer. I find I was mistaken in my an- 
swer in the examination-in-chief. It must 
have been in September I joined the order; 
because I let a gentleman read the obligsr 
tion and ritual instead of swearing him to it. 

Q. What is his name ? 

A, His name is Joseph V. Cutshaw. He 
is now Clerk of the Court. He was then a 
candidate for that office. I gave him the 
ritual to read with the understanding that* 
he would take the obligation. 

Q. At what time did you attend the first 
Grand Council? 

A, On the 16 th and 17 th of February. 

Q. Were you not at the Council in the 
fall? 

A- I was not at the November session. I 
was entitled to go as delegate, by virtue of 
my office, but I could not attend, and got 
Mr. Wilson to go in my place. 

Q„ What do you know about the military 
bill? 

A. I do not know any thing about its 
a<ioption. That bill, I understood, was con- 
fided to the Committee of Thirteen, who had 
exclusive control of it. 

Q. Who did you learn this from? 

A. I understood from Dr. Wilson that 
this was the case. 

Q. Was Dr. Wilson at the November 
meeting? 

A. I think he was. 

Q. Did he teU you this after his return ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you first hear of the mili- 
tary organization of the order ? 

A. I can not state the date. If I could be 
positive about Dr. Wilson's attendance at 
the November meeting of the Grand Coun- 
cil, T could tell you how long it was before 
or after it. 

Q. At what time did you first learn of the 
military feature of the order ? 

A. It was some time in the latter part of 
1863, or in the first part of 1864. 

Q. From whom did you learn it? 

A. From Dr. Wilson, and I believe also 
from Mr. Harris. It was at the time they 
told me about the arsenals. 

Q. Did you learn it prior to the meeting 
in Fflbruary? 

A. Yes, sir. 



Q. Did Dr. Wilson tell you prior to that 
meeting that he was on Dr. Bowles' staff? 

A. No, sir. He never told me so but once. 

Q. How often aid you see Dr. Bowles? 

A. I never saw him except once at his 
own house, once in attending Court at Paoli, 
and once at a meeting of the State Council. 

Q. When was that meeting held ? 

A. On the 16th and 17th of February. 

Q. Do you know that Dr. Bowles was 
elected major general? 

A. I was present at the election, and ar- 
ranged the counlies, attaching Orange 
county to the District, so that when Major 
McGi'ane refused to serve, Dr. Bowles could 
take his place. Major McGrane declined, 
and Dr. Bowles was elected. 

Q. Was not Dr. Bowles the junior major 
general ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. How does that come ? 

A. The mililary and civil organizations 
were not regulated alike in regard to rank 
of junior or senior. 

Q. Did not the military organization of 
the order adopt the same rules in regard to 
grades and rank as are in force in the army 
of the United States, ranking according to 
the date of their commissions? 

A. Not that I know of. 

Q. As Dr. Bowles was elected after the 
other major generals, because Major Mc- 
Grane had declined, how do you know he 
was not the junior officer? 

A. Dr. Wilson said he was the ranking 
major general, through his military experi- 
ence in the Mexican war, and had control 
of the military part of the organization. 

Q. Did not Major McGrane hold the same 
position and the same rank as that to 
which Dr. Bowles was afterward elected ? 

A. ] think not 

Q,. Why not ? 

A. Because I never knew that he was in 
the confidence of the order, and had control 
of it, as I knew Dr. Bowles was, from what 
I heard Dr. Wilson, Mr. Hamilton, and Mr. 
Logan say. 

Q. Did Dr. Bowles' election differ from 
any other ? 

A. It did not. 

Q. Are you acquainted with any act which 
led you to the conclusion that Dr. Bowles 
was at the head of the military organiza- 
tion" 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Wh£-twasit? 

A. What Dodd stated, at the February 
meeting, that Dr. Bowles was boss of the 
whole machine of the military part of the 
order. 

Q. Who were the other Major Gener- 
als? 

A. Major Conklin was one. Dr. Yeakle 
was afeo appointed as a Major General, and 
Mr. Humphreys was appointed for another 
district 



132 



TREASON TaiALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Q. "Who was intrusted with the arming 
of the order? 

A, I understood the Commander-in-chief 
of the military part of the order, Dr. Bowles, 
had charge of it. 

Q. Who received the money for that pur- 
pose? 

A. Colonel John C. Walker and Dodd, 
each, received $1,000, and Dr. Bowles re- 
ceived his share. 

Q. How much was that? 

A. I do not know. 

Q. From whom did he receive it ? 

A. I never heard. Probably from Walker 
and Dodd. 

Q. Did he have to depend on his juniors 
for funds? 

A. I do not know whether you wouM call 
them his juniors or seniors. 

Q. But seniors do not have to depend on 
their juniors in the army, do they? 

A. If they did not, they would never get 
into any battle. 

Q. Did Dr. Bowles have to rely entirely 
upon his Grand Commander tor fund.*? 

A. I can not state wholher he relied en- 
tirely on him or not. 

Q. Did you ever hear of Dr. Bowles getr 
ting money from other sources ? 

A. I did not. 

Q. When did you determine to have 
nothing more to do with tliis order? 

A. On the 1 6th of February, alter the 
case of Mr. Malott had bt-en investigated. 
I had been on the Committee of Investiga- 
tion on the charge against Mr. Malott, of 
having divulged the secrets of tlie order. 
After the report was made, Mr. IMoss, of 
Greene county, and Mi. Miiloll, left the 
room with me to take a drink. We came 
down to the foot of the stairs ; there Mr. 
Moss and Mr. Malott asked me what I 
thought of the investigation; 1 said I 
thought it did not amount to much, and 
that the whole concern was a humbug, and 
not worth a damn. One of them said, " Let's 
go and take a drink on that." We came 
down to Hezekiah's and took a drink, and 
then agreed to have nothing more to do 
with the order. 

Q. Did you inform the rest of the order 
of that intention? 

A. I did not; I did not propose to make 
a blowing-horn of myself at that time. 

Q. When were you elected? 

A. I was elected Deputy Grand Com- 
mander on the 16th or 17th of Febru- 
ary. 

Q. Before you resolved to quit it? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you comnnuiicate your intention 
to have nothing more to do with it to any 
body else ? 

A. I informed nobody but Mr. Moss, Mr. 
Malott. and Mr. Bingham, with whom 1 had 
talked frequently, and we thought we would 
let it alone, and let it grind out itself 



Q. At what time did you leave Indianap- 
olis after coming to this resolution ? 

A. That evening, or the next day. 

Q. What members of the order do you 
remember went home with you? 

A. Nobody; I went by myself; I was the 
only member from Washington county 
here, that I recollect. 

Q. Did you keep that resolution to have 
nothing more to do with it ? 

A. I did, sir; except so far as was neces- 
sary to inform my particular friends of any 
insurrection tliat might take place. 

Q. Were you a civil member ? 

A. Yes, sir; and a military one, too. 

Q. Hov/ far were you military? 

A. As far as a Grand Commander. 

Q. What were your powers? 

A. The same as the Grand Commander, 
when he was deposed, or out of the way. 

Q. How was it when you acted for or 
under him? 

A. I never acted under him; I had nothing 
to do except when he was out of the way. 

Q. Had he any right to act through you 
as his deputy? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Then you only acted in the absence or 
death of the Grand Commander? 

A. Then I would be Grand Commander 
de facto. 

Q. From what part of the organization or 
ordw did you come to the conclusion that 
when you acted as Grand Commander, Dr. 
Bowles would have a right to command 
you? 

A. Dr. Wilson said Bowles had said so 
himself That is all I did know. 

Q. Do you know whether that was any 
part of the order, military or civil? 

A. I suppose it was; I was so instructed; 
and I prcume that the officer who had 
seen service would rank those who had not 
been in the service; Colonel Bowles had 
been in the Mexican war. 

Q. How long, after you went home, 
did you elect the officers of your county 
temple ? 

A. Within a week or so of the 22d of 
February, which was said to be the anni- 
versaiy of the order, when Logan was 
elected Grand Seignior. 

Q. Mow many members had been taken 
into the order up to that time? 

A. I have no means of knowing. 

Q. Had there been a temple established 
in each township at that time ? 

A. I think not. 

Q. Did you ever participate in the estab- 
lishing of temples after that? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever meet with temples after 
that? 

A. Yes, sir; when we wanted to elect a 
couple of Justices of the Peace, sometime 
in March, I think, I went once to a meeting. 

Q. Who presided at that meeting? 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



133 



A. I believe I did, as Deputy Grand Com- 
mander. 

Q. Did you correspond with members of 
the order at that time ? 

A. I can not say that I did; except that 
about the time of Dodd's arrest, I wrote a 
letter to each of the major generals in the 
order, one to Mr. Humphreys, one to Mr. 
MiUigan, who, I remember, was sick in bed 
as the answer informed me, and one I wrote 
to Dr. Bowles, which was to be taken by a 
man by the name of Rainbow, but it was 
never sent. 

Q. "What was the substance of those 
letters ? 

A. It was that Di-. Wilson had come to 
me and said he had not talked with me for 
two or three months; that he now considered 
it his duty to do so; that as I was Deputy 
Grand Commander, and Dodd was arrested, 
1 must write to Vallandigliam and to each 
of the major generals; I did not want to do 
so, but he insisted, and I did write to Mr. 
Humphreys, Mr. MiUigan, John C. Walker, 
and Mr. Vallandigbam; I wrote to Mr. 
Bowles, bui. as I understood he was arrested 
for harboring deserters, I did not send the 
letter. 

Q. How did you write to Vallandigham? 

A. As Supreme Grand Commander of the 
Supreme Council of the United States. 

Q. How did you sign your name to this 
letter ? 

A. Horace Heftren. 

Q. Did you sign it ofHcially or unofficially? 

A. T do not recollect ; I might have signed 
it otticially. Dr. Wilson said that as Mr. 
Dodd was arrested, he thought it best to do 
something. Thomas G. Wilson, of Camp- 
bellsburg, Washington county, had been to 
Illinois, and pretended to have seen the 
Grand Commander of the State of Hlinois, 
and reported to me that Illinois was ready 
to raise, and was only waiting for Indiana, 
1 told him I did not know about such a 
movement, but thought it was best to go 
slow and not get themselves into trouble. 
Wilson wanted me to write to the Supi-eme 
Grand Commander, and also to the major 
generals in the State; I talked withhim some 
time, and said it was best not to write, but he 
insisted, aiid I wrote. He said Dodd v/as ar- 
rested, and asked what shall we do — sub- 
mit or fight? that was the subs-tance of my 
letter. 

Q. AVhat do you mean by we ? 

A. I mean the members of the Order of 
American Knights. 

Q. You forgot your resolution to have 
nothing more to do with the order, did you 
not? 

A. I acceded to Dr. Wilson's earnest so- 
licitations and wrote, although I considered 
myself out of the order ? 

Q. Did these gentlemen write back? 

A, Nor^e but Mr. Mj liyan and Mr. Hum- 
phreys. Mr. Milligan's letter was signed 



by some gentleman as " student," as he 
was sick, and it said that it would not do 
at tbf present time, btit we must abide our 
time. 

Q. What did he say about the salvation 
of God? 

A. He did not say any thing about the 
salvation of God, for I did not think it was 
near any of us at that time. 

Q. What did Mr. Humphreys say ? 

A. Last spring, coming to Indianapolis, we 
met at the Green Castle Junction, had a 
talk about the order and its organization, 
and Mr. Humphreys said it would not do. 
We had got to depend on Chicago; he 
said he was for hi^^ country, right or wrong, 
and would have nothing to do with it. He 
advised me to quit the order, and I said I 
had quit it, and would have nothing more 
to do with the order ; and I told him about 
Mr. Moss and Malott on the 1 7th of Feb- 
ruary ; Hvimphreys said he was glad of it. 

The Judge Advocate here objected to this 
class of testimony. 

Q. In reg.ard to resisting the draft, did 
not Mr. Humplireys say that it would not 
do to resist the law? 

A. He did; he said so in the letter and 
in the conveisation 1 have referred to. 

Q. What ditl he say about the men hav- 
ing, or not having, authority to use his name 
at the February meeting? 

A. He said it was without his knowledge 
or consent, and they had no right to it; he 
said he was for liis country right or wrong, 
and for the Constitution as it was. 

Q. What did Mr. MiUigan say ? 

A. I received that letter signed "student;" 
I suppose written by a student in his office. 

Q. Did Vallandigham write to you? 

A. No, sir. I did not have the honor of 
receiving a letter from him; I was too small 
fry I expect. 

Q. What was the date of your letter to 
this gentleman ? 

A. I should judge it must have been two 
months ago; it was just after Mr. Dodd was 
arrested. 

Q. How many members were at that time 
enrolled in your county ? 

A. From what I understood, there must 
have been one thousand or eleven hundred. 

Q. Who organized the county? 

A. I did; together with Dr. Wilson and 
Mr. Logan. 

Q. When did you in.tiate the Hon. M. C. 
Kerr? 

A. At Mr. Graff's saddlery; it must have 
been near Tuesday night, the 8th of March, 
1864. 

Q. How often did you meet with the 
temple in New Albany? 

A. Only those two nights; I do not think 
Mr. Kerr was there the first night, but he 
was therr the second. 

Q. W> en did you organize them? 

A. It could not have been far from the 



134 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



28th of March; it might have been abouti A. I do not know, except by contiibu 



the 25th of February that we organized that 
temple. 

Q. How many members did you take in ? 

A. About twenty or thirty. 

Q. Did you take in some each time you 
met? 

A. Yes, sir ; of course that was my busi- 
ness. 

Q. Were you allowed any thing for the 
organization of this temple ? 

A. Yes, sir. I suppose I was ; but I never 
got any thing, with the exception of what 
Mr. Jones, of New Albany, paid me, which 
was about three dollars, which paid my ex- 
penses to New Albany and back. 

Q. Had you any correspondence with other 
members ? 

A. I never wrote any letters in regard to 
the order save to Messrs. Vallandigham, 
Humphreys and Milligan, and one letter 
I wrote to Dr. Bowles, but did not send. 

Q. About what time did you appoint Wil- 
liam P. Green to act as your proxy ? 

A. I think it was in June. 

Q. At what time did Dr. Wilson show you 
the thousand dollars? 

A. It could not have been far from the 
middle of June, 1864, or when he came back 
from seeing Dr. Bowles at French Lick 
Springs. 

Q. How long was that before he told you 
to write to these men, in regard to what 
you should do? 

A. The money was shown to me some 
tim ein June; the writing was some time in 
September. I know it was near the time 
of Dodd's arrest. Mr. Dodd had not been 
arrested when he showed me the money. 
I do not know whether he had been to 
Chicago, or to Dr. Bowies'. 1 should state 
in regard to Mr. Milligan, I think thathe was 
present at the second day of the Grand 
Council in February. I have not a distinct 
and positive recollection of his being theie; 
what makes me think he was there is be- 
cause Harry Vandegrift was very anxious 
that Mr. Milligan should be nominated for 
Governor. 

Q. When was the ritual changed, if ever ? 

A. Mr. Dodd, at the February meeting, 
reported a constitution, by-laws, etc., oaths 
and obligations, but when they were changed 
I do not know; those published are not the 
same as those read ; I am certain of that. 
I do not know who changed them, or any 
thing about it. 

y. How were the ordinary expenses of 
the order kept up? 

A. By tlu', initiation fee; $1 for the first 
degree, $1 M for the second, $2 50 for the 
third degree, and twenty cents per month; 
and they had a right to tax if they saw 
fit. 

Q. How were the expenses of the Su- 
j)reme Grand Council of the United States 
to be kept up? 



tions from grand &i*d branca temples 

Q. Do you know what the expenses of 
the Grand Council of the State of Indiana 
were estimated at? 

A. I do not 

Q. What was the salary of the Secretary? 

A. My impression waa that it was to be 
eight hundred dollars per year. 

Q. Do you know any thing else about the 
expenses of the order ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Mr. Green, then, lied to you when he 
returned, or pretended to return from the 
Grand Council, did he not? 

A. Either he, or Mr. Dodd, or my brother; 
Mr. Dodd said that Mr. Green did not get 
in. 

Q. How did you sign that proxy? 

A. I signed it "Horace HctlVen," and 1 
gave him a letter of introduction to Dodd 
beside; I do noi know wlielher I signed it 
officially or not, but I presume it would be 
signed officially to Dodd. 

Q. At what time <lid you say the rebel 
raid was to be made iu Indiana? 

A. I did not say that a rebel raid was to 
be made in Indiana. 

Q. The raid in which you were to parti- 
cijDate ? 

A. I did not state that either, 

Q. What was to take place on the 16th 
of August? 

A. An uprising in the States of Indiana, 
Kentucky, <")hio and Missouri; the Confed- 
erates were to come up through Cumb(;r- 
land Gap; but we did not rise, and the 
rebels ditl not come. 

Q. What was the name of that man who 
was sent to Missouri ? 

A. I do not know; nor whether he got 
there, or had any communication with 
Price. 

Q. Do you know whether he had corre- 
spondence with General Price? 

A. Yes, sir; I understood so from Dr 
Wilson, George R. Harris and Harry Van- 
degritf, of Salem. 

Cj. Who was sent to Richmond ? 

A. 1 do not know that. 

Q. Did you ever iiKjuire? 

A. I did, of Mr. Wilson and Harris; but 
I did not find out from them; they did not 
say they knew. 

Q. Who told you about this emblem to 
save property? 

A. It was to save the property of those 
belonging to the older. I only told it to 
two men, my father and father-in-law. 

Q. Did they avail themselves of it? 

A. 1 do not know. 

Q. Did you ever make one ? 

A. I told my wife to make one; but she 
did not. 

Q. Did you ever see one? 

A. No, sir; nor did I see an»' person 
making one. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



135 



Q, What banner were you to march un- 
der when you rallied? 

A, The banner they carried in the army. 

Q. In what army ? 

A. The Confederate army, of course. If 
we could not gain a North-western Confed- 
eracy, we were to join our fortunes with 
the South. 

Q. How would you know when you could 
not get a North-western Confederany? 

A. Ab any fool would know when he got 
whipped. 

Q. Do you know that the Committee of 
Thirteen was appointed? 

A. I do not know, except that Mr. Harris 
said he knew more about that Committee 
of Thirteen than I did. 

Q. When was it that Mr. Harris told you 
this? 

A, It was after I came back from Terre 
Haute. He laughed at me, and said he 
knew better than I did what was going 
on in Terre Haute. 

Q. Did he mention the Committee of 
Thirteen? 

A. He and I have talked about it per- 
haps fifty times; he spoke of it and its ar- 
rangement, and thought the thing was 
played out, and said that the thing might 
go to the devil, for all he cared. I think 
Mr. Harris has had nothing to do with it 
since, probaV)ly, last winter. He never 
formally withdrew, that I knew of. 

Q. When did you first know of this Com- 
mittee of Thirteen, connected with the 
order ? 

A. When Mr. Bailey initiated us ; twelve 
beside myself, which was emblematical of 
the thirteen original States, and also of the 
thirteen stars on the flag; that was before 
the election of 1863. 

Q. Was not that committee appointed to 
save the expense of calling the Grand 
Council together? 

A, I never was present but at one meet- 
ing of the Grand Council, and it was not 
spoken of then. 

Q. Did you hear any thing said about 
the Conmiittee of Thirteen at that meet- 
ing? 

A. I might, but if so, I have forgotten it. 

Q. Did you ever hear any thing about 
this Committee of Thirteen before last 
June? 

A. I did, sir; I never heard any thing 
since June, that I recollect; 1 heard of it 
when Mr. Bailey initiated up, sometime in 
September, 1863; the Committee of Thir- 
teen belongs exclusively to the Grand 
Council of the State. 

Q Were the county temples instructed 
ia relation to it? 

A. I can not state, except that I was so 
instructed, and so were the gentlemen that 
were initiated with me. 

Q. This committee, you say, had power to 
appoint ten murderers, or men who had 



the dark work of taking care of Governor 
Morton ? 

A, I did not say they appointed ten mur- 
derei-8 ; I said they were a committee to 
select ten men to take care of Governor 
Morton, and hold him as a hostage ; or fail- 
ing in that, to take care of him. 

Q. What do you understand the words 
"take care of him," to mean? 

A. Just what any sensible man would; 
that if they could not use him for their 
own purposes, they might take him out and 
kill him. 

Q. When did you first understand that? 

A. I think it must have been about June, 
1864; and I packed up my carpetrsack to 
go and tell Governor Morton in regard to 
it, but my wife was taken sick, and I did 
not go. I tried to communicate with him 
when 1 was in prison, but I could not do it. 

Q. When did Wilson tell you this? 

A. I think he must have been to Chicago 
or New York, or I'rench Lick Springs; I 
am not certain; he told me when he came 
from one of those places. I knew there 
was a Grand Council somewhere about June 
that I did not attend; and there was a Su- 
preme Grand Council held in Chicago, to 
which I gave Green my proxy. 

Q. Were you told this before or after 
you gave Green your proxy to go to Chi- 
cago? 

A. I can not say for certain, but I pre- 
sume it would be after. 

Q. Then you had heard this statement of 
Wilson in regard to the appointment of ten 
men to do this dirty work? 

A. My impression is that I had, but I am 
not positive. 

Q. Could you not have let Governor Mor- 
ton know that it would be best for him to be 
careful ? 

A. I suppose I could, sir. 

Q. Did you believe that those ten men 
would do this to Governor Morton? 

A. I did, sir; I had good reasons for be- 
lieving it. 

Q. Did Kerr come to see you when this 
alarm was got up? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. And you did not meet him when he was 
on his way to Washington county, did 
you? 

A. No, sir ; or if I did, he did not inform 
me as to his business. I never knew of 
Mr. Kerr doing any tiling but what, in my 
judgment, was right and proper. 

Q. Did you ever talk with Dr. Bowles on 
this matter ? 

A. Never, in my life. 

Q. How far did you live from Di". Bowles? 

A. About thirty to thirty-five miles. 

Q. Why was this flag to be put on the 
property of members of the order and their 
friends? 

A. To save our prope; ty. It was under- 
stood that property that was not so designa- 



136 



TBEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



ted -vrould be destroyed when a rebel raid 
should take place; but if that flag was dis- 
played the destroying angel would pass 
over it, and it would not be disturbed. 

Q. You were very anxious to save Gover- 
nor Morton, but did care about your neigh- 
bors, did you ? 

A. I had nothing to do with them. My 
feelings were that I did not cure after Mor- 
gan came through, and they treated me as 
they did; I mean the soldiers under 11 ob- 
son. 

[Objected to by the Judge Advocate.] 

Q. When did you meet Felix G. Stidger 
first? 

A. I do not know that I ever saw him till 
I saw him on the stand here. I do not 
recollect any conversation with him in Sar 
I em. 

Q. Did you meet a gentleman like Stid- 
ger, from Kentucky, to whom you said you 
were expecting an envoy or commissioner 
from Kentucky to bring you word about 
the disbanding of some of Forrest's regi- 
ments? 

[Question objected to by the JudgeAdvo- 
cate.] 

The counsel for the accused remarked as 
follows: 

The witness, Stidger, has fixed the time 
and place when he had two several conver- 
sations with this man UefFren, and he has 
given the substance of these conversations; 
I now propose to show by this witness that 
no such conversation ever took place at 
either of the times ment.oned by Stidger. 
I make him my witness ♦or that purpose 
in order to save time; if Uiis is not admit- 
ted, I shall introduce him as a witness for 
the defense afterward. 

To which the Judge Advocate replied: 

This is the rule of law: that the accused 
have a right to cross-examine this witness 
as to any matter on which 1 have examined 
him in chief; only by courtesy and consent 
of the opposite party, can they step outside 
and enter upon new ground. If that con- 
sent is yielded, then I may cross-examine 
him upon that new matter; but under my 
objection they can not introduce new mat- 
ter. They may recall him, and place him 
upon the stand as their witness. 

Question withdrawn. 

Q. In the month of May last, from the 
4th to the 8th, in the town of Salf*m, and 
at the Persise House, did you, or did you 
not have a conversation about the order, 
and your relations with it, with Felix G. 
Stidger? 

A. I have no recollection of any conver- 
sation with him. 

Q. At that time and place, and in conver- 
sation with Felix G. Stidger, did you not 
inform him that yon wished to see him? 

A. I could not ask him that if I did not 
see him, and I do not recollect seeing him. 

Q. Did you not further tell him that you 



were expecting a commissioner from cer 
tain disbanded rebel regiments in Kentucky, 
and that you had mistaken him for that 
commissioner? 

A. I do not recollect any conversation 
with such a man, or of such an import. 

Q. If you had had such a conversation, 
would you not remember it? 

A I <lo not know whether I should re- 
member it or not. It is possible some 
man played himself ofl" on Stidger that 
time for me. A grea"t many men about 
Salem, at tliat time, were expecting a man 
from Cumberland Gap to report rebel 
movemnnts. My diary shows that I was 
not in town then. 

Q. What days do you refer to? 

A. The 6th and 7th, and 27th of May. 
On the 6th of May I was making a speech 
in Franklin township; on the 7th I was at 
Little York township; and on the 26th of 

May, I was at school house, in Madison 

township. 

Q. How far is that from Salem? 

A. Ten or twelve miles. I drove my 
ponies, I recollect. 

Q. D' I you see any man who resembled 
Stidger? 

A. I do not recollect any one of his per- 
sonal appearance. There was a tall, stoop- 
shouldered, black-whiskered man, called 
on me some time in the spring — CoflBn I 
suppose it was. He did not look like Stid- 
ger who testified here. He had a large 
Eoman nose. 

Q Did you have any such conversation 
with Coffin as that testified to by Stidger? 

A. I do not think I did. I thought he 
was a spy or a detective. I believ** I got 
rid of him by writing a letter of introduc- 
tion to Judge Carlton. There was a way 
of writing a letter to have it mean the op- 
posite of its purport. For int;tance, I wrote 
he was an exceedingly loyal man, and then 
put in the left hand corner the letters 0. 
A. K., with a dasli before and after "O. A. 
K.," the first letters of the signal of dis- 
tress, which gave the opposite meaning to 
the letter. 

Q. Did you not act while in prison as le- 
gal adviser to Stephen Horsey? 

A. I did not. 1 acted as a legal adviser 
to no one. You and others were my legal 
advisers, and I could not get you up to my 
room as often as I wanted you. 

Q. Did not Horsey rely on your advice 
as a lawyer? 

A. I can not say that he did, 

Q. Are not you and Mr. James B. Wilson 
on bad terms ? 

A. We are not. 

Q. When he came into Court the other 
day, did you not say angrily, that you 
would like to know whether he heard the 
story of Haman and Mordecai, of his being 
hung on the gallows he had built for 
others? 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



137 



A I do not think I made such a remark, 
but thought it pretty strong. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

1 understand you to say that you have 
no recollection of having any conversation 
with Felix G. Stidger. Is that correct? 

A. I do not recollect any such conversa- 
tion. He might have had such a conversa- 
tion with some one. 

Q. Is it not possible that he might have 
had such a conversation with you? 

A. It is, but I do not recollect it. 

Q. In regard to the incidents of that day, 
you say you have an absence of recollec- 
tion? 

A. I do. 

Q. What is the personal appearance of 
this Mr. Bailey, of Terre Haute, you have 
referred to? 

A. He is a man about twenty-five years 
of age. I understand he is dead. 

Q. I understood you to state that Mr. 
Humphreys had abandoned this order. Were 
you not informed by a letter from Hum- 
phreys and others, of his having charge of 
and being concerned in a general drill at a 
meeting of about one thousand men con- 
nected with this order, on or about the 
lines of Green, Clay, or Sullivan counties, 
during the month of September last? 

A. I did not hear of it. 

Q. Did you not hear of bis drilling mem- 
bers of the order in his county ? 

A. Not before his arrest, or since. 

Q. Did you hear of his assisting to arm 
members of the order, or giving instructions 
as to resisting the draft? 

A. No, sir. He said a great many men 
had come to him to know whether he 
would fight, and he told them to go home 
and behave themselves. 

Q. Did you ever hear of his advising re- 
sistance to the draft ? 

A. I never did, sir. 

Q. Did you ever meet him at any meeting 
of the order? 

A. I did not, sir. 

Q. How did you first know that he was a 
member of the order ? 

A. I think it was probably the letter he 
wrote to me last fall. 

Q. Did you learn that he was a member 
of the order from that letter? 

A. I am not positive. 

Q. If he had told you about the time of 
the June meeting here, and previous to that, 
that the thing was a humbug, and he had 
abandoned it, why did you wr 'o to him as 
a major general, to hear whether you were 
to come to arms on the arrest of Dodd ? 

A. At the request of Dr. Wilson, ne in- 
sisted that I should write to all the major 
generals; that I was the only one to write, 
and I, as Deputy Grand Commander, r rote 
to him as major general. That was after he 



told me that he had abandoned it, as it was 
a humbug. I wrote to him in the same 
manner that I wrote to Mi*. Milligan, but I 
wrote a little more to Mr. Vallandigham; 
and the purport of it was to see whether we 
should back out or fight, and if to fight, to 
bring the heads together at once. It was only 
to accommodate Dr. Wilson that I did it. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Friday, November 11, 1864, at 10 o'clock, 
A. M. 

CoxjuT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, > 
November 11, 1864', 10 o'clock, A. M. ) 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused, and their 
counsel. 

The proceedings of yesterday were read 
and approved. 

The following Special Field Order was 
then read by the Judge Advocate: 

HeASQUABTEBS DePABTMKNT of the CrUBEItT.AND, \ 

Atlanta, Oa., Ociober 15, 1864. J 

Special Field Orders, No. 275. 

EXTRACT. 

****!. The resignations of the fol- 
lowing named officers are accepted, to take 
efiect from this date: 

Colonel J. T. Wilder. 17th Indiana 
Mounted Infantry. Disability. 

By command of Major General Thomas. 
SOUTHAliD HOFFMAN, 

Assistayit Adjutant Oenerai. 

Some of the members of the Commission 
having expressed a desire to ask Mr. 
Hefiren some questions, he was called to 
the stand, and the following questions were 
submitted : 

Question by the Court : 

Do you know from your own knowledge, 
or from any member of the order, how 
many States were represented in the Grand 
Council of the Order of the Sons of Liberty, 
at any of their meetings? 

Answer. 1 was told by Dr. Wilson, when 
he returned from Chicago, that they were 
all represented but five ; all the States both 
North and South. 

Q. Do you recollect what five were not 
represented ? 

A. Florida and South Carolina 1 remem- 
ber being mentioned, but the other three I 
am not sure about. 

Q. Do you recollect any thing about a 
session of this order about the time of the 
Democratic Convention at Chicago? 

A. I know nothing of it except what Dr. 
Wilson said at a meeting we had called to 
raise money to buy substitutes for the poor 
men drafted in our county. He there stated 
that the object was to concentrate all the 
votes against McCleJlan, and prevent hia 
nomination at Chicaso. 



138 



TREASON TRIALS AT DfDIANAPOLIS. 



Q. Do you know the names of any who 
were there ? 

A. I do not know whether he gave any. 
At the called meeting there were present 
Colonel Menaugh, Mr. Kerr, General 
Cravens, I think, Mr. Trotter, Mr. Hamil- 
ton, 'Ms. Logan, I think, Mr. Spears, Isaac 
Baker, George Beck, R. G. Weir, a Doctor, 
whose name I forgot, he used to live in Little 
York; Dr. Newland was present, and Mr. 
Joseph Denny; there must have been fifty; 
the Sheriff of Washington county, B. F. 
Nicholson, was in the room. 

Q. Were these persons members of the 
order ? 

A. Some were; I do not think Dr. New- 
land ever was a member of it. 

Q. Do you know of this order having any 
connection with or interest in blockade run- 
ning, with reference to arms ? 

A. I was so told by members of the order; 
I was told by Mr. Dodd and by Dr. Wilson 
that Vice President Stephens had gone to 
Nassau ; that a good many arms and ammu- 
nition had been shipped there for the South- 
ern States from England, but could not get 
through the blockade, and he went to make 
arrangements with Commissioners from the 
North to have them shipped to Canada, and 
thence distributed through the North, for 
the use of the military part of this organi- 
zation. They were to come to Chicago, 
through Canada. 

Q. Do you say General Cravens was pres- 
ent at that meeting? 

A. Yes, sir. I think he was; but may be 
mistaken. I was Chairman of the meeting; 
and it was held in Salem, in the Grand Jury 
room, in the Court house, on the Monday 
after General Harlan, of Kentucky, spoke at 
Salem. At that meeting a great deal was 
said conversationally, as to what was to be 
done, and several persons asked me to make 
an announcement, which I did, requesting 
that each McClellan Club in the county 
would meet at 2 o'clock the next day, (Sun- 
day,) as the business was urgent, to send 
five delegates from each township to meet 
at Salem on the next day. 

Q. Was General Cravens a member of the 
order ? 

A. Not that I know of Dr. Wilson 
initiated persons that I knew nothing of; 
but I do not think he was a member. 

Q. You have seen those shells exhibited 
here, have you not ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have you seen them before? 

A. Not those, but some similar to them. 

Q. State when, where, and under what 
circumstances? 

A. I can not state the exact time, but it 
was sometime last summer. Mr. iPersise, 
who keeps a hotel in Salem, called me, and 
introduced me to a gentleman who was 
stopping there ; he requested me to go to 
his room, and I went — to the stranger's 



room. He had a box something like a con- 
ductor's box, but much deeper. He asked 
me if I had ever seen these things; I said I 
had not. Mr. Persise told me he requested 
him to register his name, but he did not. 
He also had a hand grenade. As soon as I 
saw the one in Court, I saw it was on the 
same principle. He said what it was to 
be used for, but I did not exactly under- 
stand him, and did not talk much to him. 
He had a ritual of the first degree, and 
asked me if it was true. He was a shortish 
man, about five feet eight, or ten, wore 
specs, had dark hair and whiskers. He 
represented himself as coming from back 
of Louisville. 1 concluded he was a Detec- 
tive, and did not have as much to say as 1 
otherwise might, for J had been threatened 
with arrest. I did not learn his name ; 
neither do I know if he was in the habit of 
wearing spectacles, or not. 

Q. Do you know if he was a member of 
the order? 

A. He said he was; but I did not try him. 
He unscrewed thehand-grenade, and showed 
me the nipples on the inner shell, and that 
is how 1 recognized it as soon as the Judge 
Advocate brought it up in Court 

Q. For what purpose did he say it was to 
be used? 

A. For the purpose of destroying Gov- 
ernment property 'I'he Greek fire, he said, 
had been improved, and was much better 
than that used before. It was to be so ar- 
ranged that a person coulii take it in a viol 
and walk along a building, and throw it 
down, and it could be so prepared in regard 
to its strength, as to take fire after three or 
four, or more hours; and neither vinegar, 
water nor molasses would put it out. I was 
told by Becking, when in prison, how it was 
made; he said it was bi-sulphate of carbon 
and phosphorus. 

Q. Was the man you saw at Salem, Mr. 
Booking? 

A. I can not say positively; he is a man 
who fits his description as near as possible, 
but 1 can not positively swear to his 
identity. Mr. Humphreys said, from my 
description, after Booking's arrest, that 
he was the same man. I am not certain 
he is. 

Q. You may describe his personal appear- 
ance. 

A. He had on pretty much the same 
clothes as Booking had; he wore glasses, 
and talked very much like Booking. 

Q. Why was he exhibiting this Greek fire 
and the hand-grenades? 

A. I can not tell why. 

Q. What was his professed object? 

A. He wanted to know whether I had 
seen these inventions, and asked whether I 
had not heard that Government stores and 
boats had been burned at St. Louis and 
Louisville. He then said, in reference to 
the Greek fire, " That is what did it." I 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



139 



answered that 1 had heard of these shells, 
but had not seen them. 

Q. Was bo a member of the order? 

A, He claimed to be such. Mr. Persise 
ought to know better than I do. He asked 
me if I recollected him about the time I 
was arrested ; and when he told me of these 
circumstances, I remembered them. 

Q. Did Booking make this communica- 
tion to you as a member of the order? 

A. That is what I understood, sir. I did 
not know whether he professed to be a 
member of the order for the purpose of 
finding out something, and reporting it, or 
whether he was a bona fide member. I mis- 
trusted him as a boyia fide member ; but sub- 
sequent events proved that he was. I was 
confirmed in my judgment that he was a 
member from what he told me after I was 
put in prison with him. I reported to Col- 
onel Warner what I knew of the gentle- 
man. He was released on parole on the 
same day Humphreys was put in with me. 

Q. Why did you report him ? 

A. I reported to Colonel Warner that he 
took a letter out for a prisoner in the next 
celL I did so, because I did not want to be 
accused of being with a man who was try- 
ing to get out and injure me afterward. 

Q. Is Mr. Booking a member of the 
order ? 

A. I understand he is; he told me so 
himself 

Q. In this same conversation, did he tell 
you that he exhibited these machines to 
any body. else; and if so, to whom? 

A. I can not say positively whether he 
did or did not; it seems to me he said some- 
thing about exhibiting it in J^iouisville. 

Q. Do I understand you that Mr. Booking 
told you this while he was in prison with 
you? 

A. Yes, sir; and the same conversation 
took place with him in Salem, if he is the 
same man. 

Q. Will you describe the man you saw at 
Salem ? 

A. He was a man, I should judge, about 
five feet nine inches high, darkish hair; he 
wore glasses, and, from his accent, I should 
judge him to be a foreigner; he is between 
thirty-five and forty years of age. 

Q. Please describe Mr. Booking. 

A. I will have to give the same descrip- 
tion for him. 

Q. Will you describe Mr. Booking as you 
saw him in prison? 

A. He was about five feet nine inches, 
wore dark clothes and glasses ; a foreigner, 
I judge, and 1 believe he told me so; he is 
from thirty -five to forty years of age, and 
used to stay at Ryan & Elliot's store, he 
Baid, in this city, and does yet, if he is re- 
leased. 

Q. Have you seen or conversed with him 
eince you saw him in pris, n ? 

A. Yes, sir. 



Q. What did he say, at any time, of his 
being a member of the order? 

A. He did not deny it. When he was in 
the same cell with me he wanted to see Mr. 
Gordon, and to know why he was in prison, 
and said that they had got suspicious of 
him because he would not tell what he 
knew, and that was the reason he was put 
in prison. 

Q. He always maintained that he was a 
member of the order, did he not? 

A. Yes, sir, in all the conversation I had 
with him. He told me, also, of a man that 
was put in with him for horse-stealing. 
Colonel Warner, I believe, said this man 
was a spy, for he had my name on his 
books. 

Q. Was this man, who exhibited the 
Greek fire at Salem, a fleshy or a lean 
man? 

A. I do not think he was either. 

Q. How is Booking, fleshy or lean ? 

A. He was just aViout the same in that 
respect. The very instant I set my eyes on 
Booking, after I was arrested, I took him to 
be the same man I saw at Salem. 

Q. Did you notice the color of his eyes ? 

A. When at Salem he wore glasses, and I 
never saw the color of his eyes. 

Q. Were both these persons foreigners? 

A. They were. 1 called him at first a 
German; but he said that he was a Belgian. 

RE-CROaS-EXAMlNATION. 

The counsel for the accused requested, 
as a courtesy, the privilege of cross-exam- 
ination of tlie witness on the new points 
brought out by the examination by the 
Court, to which the Judge Advocate waived 
all objection. 

Question by the accused : 

At what time was this man, who exhib- 
ited the Greek fire, at the Persise House, in 
Salem ? 

Answer. Sometime last summer. 

Q. You will please fix the time as near as 
you can? 

A. I can not fix it with certainty, except 
that it was sometime in June, I judge. I 
have no memorandum to fix it by. It was 
in May or June. 

Q. Did he give you his name ? 

A. He did not. 

Q. Why did he refuse to give it? 

A. I did not ask him for it. 

Q. How did he register his name ? 

A. Mr. Persise said he refused to register 
his name. 

Q. Is Mr. Persise a member of the or- 
der? 

A. He is. 

Q. Do you know that this man you saw 
at Salem is a member of the order, from 
any thing except from what he said ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you test him ? 

A. No, sir. 



140 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Q. You stated, did you not, that after 
you saw Booking conceal this letter fora pris- 
oner, you told Colonel Warner of the mat- 
ter? 

A. I told Colonel Warner of his taking a 
letter out for a prisoner in the next cell, 
which was passed to him through a crack. 
Colonel Warner told me that this man had 
my name on his book. There was a secret 
back pocket in the linmg of his coat, be- 
tween the shoulders, in which he put the 
letter. I saw him put it there, and lake it 
out with him when he was released, on 
parole. 

Q. At what time was this ? 

A. I think it was when they called for 
him and he was released on parole. Mr 
Humphreys was put in the same cell with 
me after his release. I think I told Col- 
onel Warner I thought it very strange he 
should be released, and we should be 
kept in ? 

Q. How did you come to make this state- 
ment to Colonel Wai-ner? 

A. From the fact that I did not want any 
body in the cell next to me, who had con- 
cealed a saw, and was trying to cut his way 
out, and have the suspicion of assisting in 
his escape rest on me, and suffer punish- 
ment for it. I thought we were in a bad 
enough scrape, without getting into a worse 
one. I told Colonel AVarner to search his 
carpet sack, ana it was searched, so the 
sergeant said. 

Q. Did you not, at that time, commence 
making arrangements with Colonel Warner 
to become a witness? 

A. No, sir; and I made no arrangements 
with the Judge Advocate. When he spoke 
to me to take the stand, 1 thought he 
spoke to Dr. Wilson who sat behind me, 
and supposed he was going to put him on 
the stand, until he spoke to me the second 
time. Instead of making any arrange- 
ment to be put on the stand, on the con- 
trary I told the Judge Advocate I would 
not be put on the stand under any })ledge 
or promise, and only on the condition of 
making a ful! and true statement, for if 
sworn I would tell the truth. 

Q. I will ask you, with the permission of 
the Judge Advocate, whether that morn- 
ing, beiore dinner, you did not have a 
conversation with Governor Morton or 
General Hovey, either with one or both of 
them? 

A. I did. The conversation was confi- 
dential. 

Q. Did you not let them know that you 
were willing to become a witness? 

A. 1 think General Hovey asked me if I 
would be a witness; I said tliat if I was put 
upon the stand, I would have to tell the 
truth as any other man would. 

Q. Do you know how long this conversa- 
tion was before you were put upon the 
stand? 



A. It could not have been long before, 
because the Court was waiting when I 
came in. 

Q. Was it in this room or out of it? 

A. If it had been in this roon>, I would 
not have come in and found the Court 
waiting. I had endeavored to obtain an 
interview with General Hovey, and wrote 
to him requesting one, but received no an- 
swer. 

Q. Why did you seek an interview? 

A Because I wanted to get out of the 
sciape. 

Q. How did you propose to get out of the 
scrape? 

A. I made no proposition. 

Q. Did you tell them you would reveal 
what you knew? 

A. No, sir; I told them I would have to 
testify as any other man would who was 
sworn. 

Q. Did you not know that they could not 
make you a witness without discharging 
you? 

[Objected to by the Judge Advocate, and 
withdrawn.] 

BE-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

Please state whether you ever had from 
any Government official any pledge or 
promise, if you would come upon the stand 
as a witness ? 

A. I did not ; I had not received or ex- 
pected any pledge. 

Q. Did I ever hint to you that you were 
to be a witnt\Hs ? 

A. You did not, sir; and I asked Colonel 
Dunham, just before 1 was called on the 
stand, to ask the Judge Advocate if I 
should have my witnesses sul^penaed or 
not. The next thing I was on the stand. 

Q. Your interview with me was without 
any pledge or promise, and by your own in- 
clination, was it not? 

A. Yes, sir. 

The witness here requested the privilege 
of making a correction in his previous tes- 
timony, in regard to Mr. Kerr's taking 
three degrees. The first night I organized 
the Council at New Albany, Indiana, they 
all took three degrees, for it could not be 
organized unless they had taken the three 
degrees. Mr. Kerr was not there the first 
night, and I think he took only the first 
degree the second night. 

Q. Do you mejin the first degree proper? 

Yes, sir. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Saturday morning, November 12, 1864, 
at 9 o'clock, A. M. 

CouET KooM, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1 
Noviiibor \2, 18*54, 9 o'clock, A. M.j 

The Commissi •HI met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment 

All the members present. Also, tha 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



141 



Judge Advocate, the accused, and their 
counsel. 

The proceedings were read and ap 
proved. 

J 4MES L. Mason, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, was then introduced, and, being duly 
bworn. testified as follows: 

1 have resided in Greenfield, Hancock 
county, Indiana, for the past eight years. 
I am Senator from that district. I do not 
Know that I have ever joined any secret 
society except the Freemasons. I never 
took the obligation of either the Order of 
Sons of Liberty, or the American Knights; 
and 1 never read the obligations of these 
orders until I saw them in the newspapers. 
A gentleman, a Mr. Hall, who reported 
himself as from Rush county, came to my 
office in 1862, and told me about a secret 
order, and read a ritual to me, but 1 did 
not consider that I took it, and I really do 
not remember what was the name of the 
order about which he spoke; it certainly 
was not the American Knights, or Sons of 
Liberty, but it might have been the Circle 
of Honor. I do not know the purpose of 
bis visit to our place, nor do I remember 
that he said it was for the purpose of estab- 
lishing a lodge. I never saw that gentle- 
man before or after. He stated what the 
order was, and certain facts about it, but I 
do not think he stated the obligation, nor 
do I remember re[»eating any thing after 
him. My present recollection is, that I did 
not; nor did he authorize me to form 
lodges, that I remember. Our interview 
did not last more than fifteen or twenty 
minutes. I believe he came with a letter 
of introduction from his brother. I do not 
remember that he had any further business 
with me than talking about this order. 
Possibly his object might have been to in- 
duce me to form a lodge. I did not take 
any steps to establish the order; nor did I 
assist in organizing any lodge in the State. 

Harrison Connki.l, a witness for the 
Government, was then introduced, and, 
being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, 
testified as follows: 

I reside in Martin county, Indiana. I 
joined a secret society in our county, about 
two years ago. I believe it was called the 
" American Knights." I joined at the so- 
licitation of Stephen Horsey. We met in 
the evening at a school-house in Columbia 
township. Mr. Hoi'sey lives in the adjoin- 
ing township. I do not remember how 
many meetings I attended; I never drilled 
with the order. Some ammunitioti was 
brought to that neighborhood; by whom I 
do not know, nor do I know for what pur- 
pose. Stephen Horsey, the accused, told me 
to meet him about a mile and a half from 
the Shoals, on a certain evening, and we 
went some distance down the railroad, 
where we found some ammunition lying 
near the road. We put »t in a sack, and 



carried it kome. There was a keg of powder, 
a package ot lead and a package of caps. I 
do not know where the ammunition was 
concealed; it was Mr. Horsey wl\o took me 
to it. When I started, he did not tell me 
where he wanted me to go with him. He 
wished me to take care of the ammunition, 
and I put it in my barn, in the granary, 
and it was covered over with thrashed oats. 
When 1 was arrested, I gave it up to the 
Detectives. I do not know where the money 
came from with which the ammunition 
was purchased. It was in August, or the 
latter part of July, 1864, that I went with 
Horsey to fetch the ammunition. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I sTiould have stated that William Clay- 
ton initiated me. I attended a meeting of 
the order last winter at the Gaddis House, 
at which a Mr. Stone spoke, and the man 
who spoke led us to think that we were 
sworn into the service of Jeff Davis. I re- 
member the men were very much dissatis- 
fied with his speech. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Monday the 14th, at 2 o'clock, P. M. 

CocET KooM, Intiianapolis, Indiana, \ 
November 14. 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, and the accused, (except 
W. A. Bowles,) and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

The following communication from W. 
A. Bowles, one of the accused, was then read 
to the Commission, by the Judge Advo- 
cate: 

To the President and Members of the Conmiission: 
My health being such that I can not 
attend the sittings of your body, I hereby 
waive my right to attend the same, and 
authorize you to proceed in my absence 
with my trial, as if 1 were present. 

[Signed] W. A. BOWLES. 

November 14, 1864. 

A member of the Commission objected to 
proceeding with the trial during the absence 
of one of the accused. 

The Court was then cleared for delibera 
lion. 

On being re-opened, the Judge Advocate 
announced that the objection was over- 
ruled. 

Elisha Cowgill, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn, testified as follows: 

I reside at Greencastle, Putnam county, 
Indiana. In 1863, I was Provost Marshal 
in the Seventh District. While in the per- 
formance of my duties there, I was brought 
in ccntact with Mr. Andrew Humphreys. 
It was about the 4th of June, 1863, when 1 
saw Mr. Humphreys at the head of about 



142 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



four hundred men. When T first came up, 
Mr. Humphreys was speaking to the crowd. 
When I rode up toward him, he came to- 
ward me, and was introduced to me by 
Edward Price, of Sullivan county. 

I asked a number of persons who were 
there, what they were assembled for, and 
they answered to protect themselves. All 
that I saw were armed, except perhaps one 
or two. Mr. Humphreys had command of 
them. They did not profess to be called 
out as militia, by the United States, or by 
the State authorities. I had a conversation 
with Mr. Humphreys of about an hour. Mr 
Humphreys talked a great deal about the 
President of the TTnited States, calling him 
an old tyrant before the crowd, who was 
usurping a great deal of power, and wasting 
the treasure of the United States, and the 
lives of the citizens. He also stated that 
he was killing <>!!* about forty thousand men 
per day. He also spoke of Vicksburg, and 
asked what I knew about it. Threats were 
made against me, by men in the crowd, and 
some of them swore they would kill any 
man who attempted to enroll Cass town- 
ship. They called me a "damned abolition 
rascal," a "Lincoln pup," and a "Lincoln 
dog," that deserved to be killed. Some said 
they ought to kill me before I got out of tlio 
crowd. They wanted me to tell them who 
the enrolling officer of that township would 
be. I told them he would be known to 
them in due time. His name was Fletcher 
Freeman. I had given him the enrolling 
papers the night before. He was afterward 
shot and killed. Mr. Humphreys made a 
second speech to the people, and advised 
them to go home and mind their own busi- 
ness; he asked me if I did not indorse this; 
I answered that I did. He also told them, 
"Do not sleep too soundly." I then went 
off, and a man named Ursey came into Sul- 
livan with me. I regarded Andy Hum- 
phreys as a leader of the rabble. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

This took place about the 4th of June, 
1863, in Sullivan county, and I understood 
it was in Cass township; just beyond there 
is a little town called Caledonia. Mr. Hum- 
phreys did advise the crowd to go home and 
mind their own business. They manifested 
no violence toward me except in their talk, 
and Mr. Humphreys remarked that there 
was no danger unless they got to drinking. 
I do not remember that Humphreys said 
in my hearing, that the people had got ex- 
cited because some soldiers had shot at a 
man. A small portion of the crowd were 
on horseback. 1 thought Mr. Humphreys' 
remarks were intended to stop them from 
committing any violence until he told them 
" not to sleep too soundly." When he 
spoke about the President as a tyrant, he 
was standing on a log, and the crowd were 
close around him. He dealt in about such 



epithets, as the Democratic speakers used 
at that time. Mr. Humphreys was armed 
with a revolver. 1 did not say that I could 
indorse Mr. Humpheys' speech, except that 
part where he advised them to go home. 
I think Mr. Humphreys asked the crowd 
to hear me ; it was when Mr. Price intro- 
duced me to Mr. Humphreys, and then 
he (Humphreys) told the crowd that I was 
the son of Judge Cowgill, and that he was 
a mighty good Democrat. I said I did not 
want any credit on that account, as I dif- 
fered with my father on poUtical topics. 
I may have tried to make a speech to 
them, for I asked them to select a subject 
if they want«^d to hear me. They selected 
the Conscription Bill. I then told them 
that the first thing to be done was to have 
an enrollment. They all swore that they 
would not have one. At this point Mr, 
Humphreys came up and made them keep 
quiet. 

In coming out from Sullivan, I met some 
soldiers that day. They were marching back 
toward Sullivan. There was probably fifty 
or sixty of them. When I saw them they 
were stopping, and were not marching either 
way. The men in the crowd were armed, 
some with squirrel rifles, some with phot 
guns, and others with pistols and buwie 
knives. 

The meeting was in the woods, near the 
little town of Caledonia. The country 
about there is sparsely settled. I do not 
know why the crowd assembled beyond what 
they stated, that they were there to pro- 
tect themselves, and vindicate theii* rights. 

Mr. Ursey came to Sullivan and tried to 
get me drunk. When 1 got him drunk, 
he became very communicative, and told 
me that Mr. Humphreys commanded the 
cavalry and he the infantry. I do not know 
that the crowd did any violence to any 
body that day. While I was there, Mr. 
Humphreys was evidently trying to keep 
the crowd quiet, and he succeeded to a cer- 
tain extent. I left before they dispersed. 
T saw Mr. Humphreys' revolver, for he 
happened to be in his shirt sleeves, and 
was sitting down by a tree talking to me; 
his revolver was buckled on behind. He 
did not say why he wore it, but remarked 
that he was expecting to be arrested 

I remarked his asking me about the 
news from Vicksburg, as to whether the 
Government troops would take it ; he also 
asked me what General Grant's daily losses 
were. I said I could not tell. He then 
commenced talking about himself, and 
asked me whether 1 knew of any arrange- 
ments being made to have him arrested. 1 
said I did not. He did not say what he 
expected to be arrested for; but I think 
while we were^u conversation, he remarked 
that if 1 would go there by myself, he 
would take care of me over night at his 
house, and would go over the next mora 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



143 



ing to Indianapolis with me, as he did not 
want any parade about it, if he was to be 
arrested. 

There were no flags in the crowd that I 
paw, and each man wore his own citizen's 
suit. 

In answer to interrogatories put by the 
(.Commission, the witness testified as follows : 

I do not know that the enrolling ofl&cer 
was shot and killed while in the perform- 
ance of his duty. My knowledge of his 
death came from Colonel Thompson. He 
had two townships to enroll, and wa« killed 
while working on the road, after having 
ut^arly completed the first township. I got 
his papers, and went down and finished 
it myself; and got a man to attend to the 
other. 

RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I have no personal knowledge of the 
manner of his death; I speak from hear- 
say. His death occurred about ten days 
after the meeting referred to. 

Dr. James B. Wilsox, a witness for the 
Government, was called to the stand, and, 
being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, 
testified as follows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 

Please state your name, and where you 
reside. 

Answer. James B. Wilson, Salem, Wash- 
ington county, Indiana. 

Q. What is your profession, or business? 

A. I am a farmer at this time. 

Q. How long have you resided in Salem, 
Indiana? 

A .\bout fourteen years next February. 

Q. State whether you ever joined any 
secret order or society known as the Amer- 
ican Knights, or Sons of Liberty. 

A. Yes, air; I joined an order known as 
the American Knights ; I think it was in 
September or October, sometime in the fall 
of 1863. 

Q. Wh^re? 

A. At Salem, at the office of Colonel 
Heffren. 

Q, By whom were you initiated ? 

A. By Mr. Bailey. 

Q. Who else were initiated at that time? 

A. I do not think I can give the names 
of all, but I can of some: Mr. HefiFren, Mr. 
Harris, Mr. McCoskey, Mr. Cutshaw, Mr. 
Garris, Mr. Green, Mr. Fultz and Mr. Beck. 

Q. What was the next meeting that you 
attended after your initiation? 

A. A meeting at this place. It was said to 
be a meeting of the members of the order 
in the State, and was composed of delegates 
sent from the different county temples. 

Q. Who presided at that meeting? 

A. Mr. Dodd; I do not remember who 
was in the chair at first. 

Q. About what time in the day, and at 
what date, did this meeting occur ? 

A. I think about the 6tii of November. 



Q. Were any of the accused present? 

A. Dr. Bowles was present. 

Q. What business was transacted at that 
meeting? 

A. There were some committees ap-, 
pointed; a Military Committee, a Commit- 
tee on Education, and one committee in 
reference to establishing a newspaper to 
be considered the organ of the organiza- 
tion. 

Q. Who composed the Military Commit- 
tee? 

A. I can not tell; I thought, from the ac- 
tions of Dr. Bowles, that he must be the 
Chairman of that committee, as he made a 
verbal report. 

Q. Did Mr. Dodd make a speech ? 

A, Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember what that speech 
was? 

A. I remember something of it ; he spoke 
about talking treason for awhile; it was to- 
ward the close of the meeting. 

Q. State about how he said that, and what 
he was talking abo^ at that time. 

A. I can not give his language, because it 
is so long ago, and I did not refer to it very 
often. 1 can only give you the impression 
it left upon my mind. He said that he would 
"kick down the walls of common decency," 
or some such expression, " and talk treason 
for awhile." He said, "if the purposes of 
this organization could not be carried out, 
as explained by Mr. Wright, there were oth- 
ers that could be resorted to; they could 
very easily, if their organization was fully 
completed, t«.ke possession of the railroads, 
cut the telegraph wires, and throw in at one 
time troops enough at the capital to take 
the State Government and have things our 
own way." 

Q. About what time in the day did he 
make this speech? 

A. In the afternoon. 

Q. Was Mr. Bowles present at that meet- 
ing? 

A. I think he was. 

Q. Was Mr. Humphreys present ? 

A. I did not know Mr. Humphreys then. 

Q. Do you know if Mr. Bingham was 
present at that time ? 

A. I did not know Mr. Bingham at that 
time. 

Q. What else was said, if any thing? 

A. There was a great deal said. 

Q. Was there any thing done or said in 
reference to any member who might have 
revealed any thing in regard to the order? 

A. Not that I can call to my recollection. 
I think there was something said on that 
subject, bui I can not now recollect it. 

Q. Did you ever attend any other Grand 
Council of the State? 

A. No, sir; I never did. 

Q. Did you not attend a meeting of the 
Council at Chicago, or of a committee? 

A- I did, sir; I understood from a gen- 



144 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



tleman who was present in the meeting, 
that it was to be composed of the military 
part of the organization; and he had called 
it at his own instance. 
. Q. From whom did you learn this? 

A. Mr. Barrett said that it was to be com- 
posed of the military men of the order. 

Q. Did you ever establish any lodges, or 
take any active part in the propagation of 
this society ? 

A. Yes, sir, I did. 

Q. To what extent? 

A. I established lodges in three different 
townships in Washington county. 

Q. How extensive were these lodges in 
the townships of your county ? 

A. There were lodges in all townships in 
jur county except two. 

Q. Did you visit all these lodges? 

A. I think 1 did. 

Q. When you visited these lodges, what 
did you go for? 

A. For the purpose of giving them the 
work of the Neophyte or First Degree. 

Q. Did you ever give them more than the 
Neophyte degree, or the First or Vestibule 
degree? 

A. I think I assisted in giving the second 
and third degrees to a couple of gentle- 
men. 

Q. To whom ? 

A. Captain Hamilton and B. F. Nichol- 
son, of Washington county. 

Q. Did you go for any thing else' 

A. Yes, sir; for the purpose of giving 
them instructions in the object of the order, 
and give them information that I thought 
was reliable. 

Q. What information did you give them 
at any time? 

A. I gave them information about the 
preparation in Illinois, which I received 
from a gentleman named Wright, from 
the State, and formerly from Washington 
countv. 

Q. What did he tell you? 

A. I learned from Mr. Wright that they 
were ready for any movement; that they 
had arms in their hands, generally, antl 
were ready for any emergency that the 
order might contemplate, or wish to carry 
out. 

Q. Did he report to you how extensively 
the organization was armed in Illinois ? 

A. Yes, sir; he said they were generally 
prepared. 

Q. What were the preparations in Illi- 
nois? 

A. In the county where he resided, he 
said almost the entire Democratic party. 

Q. Did you learn the extent of the order 
in the State? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. State what you know in regard to the 
arming and drilling, or the attempt to arm 
and drill inyour county, preceding your visit 
to Chicago, lUinois. 



A. I am not aware of any special efforts 
made at arming, only as individual mem- 
bers of the order armed themselves. I 
know of a great many members of the 
order buying pistols. 

Q. Do you know of any attempts to 
drill? 

A. I understood that Mr. Hamilton had 
a company, and that they had drilled. 

Q. Now please tell the Court about your 
visit to Chicago; and how you came to go 
there ? 

A. I think I went there mostly at my 
own suggestion; I was in bad health, and 
thought a trip up there might be of service 
to me, and suggested that if no one de- 
sired to go there, I would go myself; I 
spoke to Ml'. Heffren, Mr. Han-is, and a 
number of persons about it. 

Q. Did any one accompany you ? 

A. Mr. Green did. 

Q. Is he a member of the order ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What time did you start to Chi- 
cago? 

A. I think about the 1 9th of July, 1864, 
and arrived on the morning of the 20th, I 
think. 

Q. Where did you stop in Chicago ? 

A At the Tremont House. 

Q. Whom did you see there from this 
State? 

A I believe only Mr. Dodd and Dr. 
Bowles. 

Q. Give an account of where you went 
and what you did while in Chicago? 

A. I think we got in early in the morn- 
ing of the 20th; and after taking breakfast 
we went down to the Richmond House, 
where Dr. Bowles said he stopped, and in- 
quired for his room ; we were shown to it 
by a servant of the house, but he happened 
to be in an adjoining room. There seemed 
to be a promiscuous conversation going on; 
they talked about politics a little and on 
sundry matter.?. After having listened for 
some time, I think I asked if there was 
not going to be a meeting. Dr. Bowles re- 
marked to me that there would be a meet- 
ing, but they were not ready for it, as the 
persons they expected had not arrived. 

il. Who were those persons? 

A. Mr. Dodd, for one. 

Q. Where did h«5 say Dodd was? 

A. He said that he was gone to Niagara 
Falls, or had started to go there ; but expect- 
ed to get hiick in time for the meeting. Af- 
ter remaining some time, we found there was 
not to be a meeting until the next day. 
The next morning we went back to Dr. 
Bowles' room, and learned that Judge Bul- 
litt and Mr. Williams had arrived. When 
we had remained a little while in Dr. 
Bowles' room, these gentlemen came in, 
and I am not sure but wo went into another 
room. 

Q. Who was there ? 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



145 



A. Judge Bullitt, Mr. Piper, Mr. Wil- 
liams, and Mr. Barrett, I remember. 

Q. What was said there? 

A. The conversation was again of a pro- 
miscuous character. After sitting a while, 
some one suggested that perhaps we had 
better hear why Mr. Barrett had called 
the meeting. He said that he had called 
for a military meeting, to be composed, as 
he had expected, of the military men of 
this organization, and that he had used his 
best eftbrts to get men of that character 
to the meeting, but that he believed" he had 
failed. He did not name whom he ex- 
pected. 

He then stated that his object in calling 
the meeting was, that he thoughttheGovern- 
ment could be restored, and he was satis- 
fied it could be if we could get the co-ope- 
ration of the North with the South, or a 
portion of the North, Ohio, Indiana, Illi- 
nois, Missouri and Kentucky; he said if 
the members of the Sons of Liberty in the 
States would co-operate with the South, 
he had no doubt the entire Government 
would be saved through their action. He 
also said that it had been contemplated to 
have an uprising at some time soon, per- 
haps as early as the third of August, but 
that had fiiiled from some cause; and he 
thought every thing could be got ready for 
an uprising, perhaps, by the 10th or 15th of 
the month, and that the South, in order to 
show her willingness to engage in some 
movement that would restore the Govern- 
D^ient, had authorized him to place at the 
disposal of members of the organization, a 
large sum of money, amounting to two 
millions of dollars. 

Q. Did he say where the money came 
from ? 

A. He said that it had been captured 
from a United States Paymaster on Red 
river, and that the organization could have 
the use of that amount of money in pre- 
paring themselves to rise against the Lin- 
coln administration; that it would be dis- 
tributed to the several Grand Commanders 
of those States, and by them subdivided 
among such persons inside of the order as 
in their judgment was prudent, and to be 
expended by those who received it for arms 
and other appliances of war. And he fur- 
ther stated, that in calling this meeting it 
was done at hip own suggestion; that this 
money was to be used for the benefit of 
the order, and that as he did not wish any 
of the delegates there to be at any expense, 
if we would make out our bills of expenses 
in coming and while there, he would pay 
us; and he did; at least I got mine, forty 
dollars. 

Q. Where did he get this money from ? 

A. I do not know; but I think he said it 
was captured from a paymaster on Red 
river. 

Q. And did he pay all their expenses? 
10 



A. I understood they would all receive 
their expenses if they desired it. 

Q. What else was said at that meet- 
ing? 

A. That was about the amount of what 
was said ; I do not recollect that any one 
discussed the matter, or offered any partic- 
ular opinion at that time. 

Q. Was any thing said about the destruc- 
tion of Government property ? 

A. Yes, sir; but not at that meeting; I 
think it was on the afternoon of that day 
or the next, I am not sure which, he stated, 
in speaking of the money, that it had been 
used for the purpose of paying for the de- 
struction of United States property, ar- 
senals, burning boats, etc. 

Q. Did he say how this was to be paid? 

A. He said they would pay ten per cent, 
on property so destroyed, and were willing 
to make an estimate upon the value as- 
sessed by Govei'nment officers, that would 
generally be announced through the North- 
ern newspapers; that they would take the 
Government estimate as a basis for calcula- 
tion. 

Q. Did he give any instance where Gov- 
ernment property had been destroyed? 

A. Yes, sir; the burning of some Gov- 
ernment stores in Louisville, on Eighth 
street, I believe; also the desii'uction of 
some Government boats on the Ohio river, 
and one, I believe, at St. Louis. 

Q. And those persons were to receive ten 
per cent., you say? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he say what means were used to 
destroy this property ? 

A. I afterward learned from Dr. Bowles 
that the means employed was Greek fire. 

Q. What else took place at that meeting 
in Chicago? 

A. There was an explanation made, I 
afterward learned from Dr. Bowles more 
particularly, in regard to a flag ; that the 
members of the organization should be 
careful to have instructions sent to their 
friends that in case of an invasion by the 
guerrillas, the members should make use 
of a flag, made of white cloth, with a red 
ribbon running along the top and carried 
down the sides and hanging below, like 
strea.mers; this was to be tied to a stick. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Tuesday, November 15, 1864, at '.' 
o'clock, A. M. 



Court Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, > 
Kovemberl5, 18C4, 9 o'clock, A. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment- 
All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused, (except W. 
A. Bowles,) and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 
The examination of James B. Wilson, a 



146 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



witness for the Government, was then re- 
sumed as follows : 

Question by the Judge Advocate : 

Did you meet any persons who purported 
to represent the Southern Confederacy at 
the Chicago meeting, or convention, to which 
you have referred? 

Answer. Yes, sir. A man calling himself 
by the name of Majors; and Mr. Barrret, 
also, stated that he was authorized to repre- 
sent the Southern Confederacy. 

Q. You say that Mr. Barrett represented 
himself as a representative of the Southern 
Confederacy at that meeting? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did any of those gentlemen profess to 
represent any special States, or only the 
Southern Confederacy generally? 

A. The Southern Confederacy generally. 

Q. Did you learn who were the parties 
that were expected there, but did not come? 

A. I do not think I did. I think that 
Mr. Amos Green, of Illinois, was mentioned 
as being expected, and it was also expected 
that Mr. Vallandigham would be there, but 
they had learned prior to the meeting that 
he would not be there, and had sent a 
messenger to him. 

Q. Who was that messenger? 

A. I think it was Mr. Green, or Mr. Hol- 
loway, or perhaps both. 

Q. Did you learn whether they saw Mr. 
Vallandigham ? 

A. I do not think I did. 

Q. Did you hear Mr. Dodd, or Mr. Hol- 
loway, or any other person say in reference 
to this meeting, that they had had any con- 
versation with Mr. Vallandigham ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Where did Mr. Dodd come from? 
where did he represent himself to have 
been? 

A. At the Clifton House, near Niagara 
Falls. 

Q. For what purpose? 

A. To meet with the commissioners, or 
delegates, that were duly authorized by 
the Southern Confederacy to meet at that 
meeting. 

Q. Who were they? 

A. Holcomb, Clay, Saunders, and another, 
whom I supposed was this Majoi's, Captain 
Majors, as he was called. The way I re- 
member this is, that something was said 
about a safe conveyance being asked for by 
Mr. Holcomb in his address to Mr. Greeley 
for himself, Mr. Clay, Mr. Saunders, and 
another ; this other man, I understood, was 
Captain Majors. 

Q. Is this Captain Majors the one you 
spoke of as being at Chicago? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you learn of any part that was to 
be taken by the different leading men in 
this contemplated uprising? If so, what? 
Who, for instance, was to lead in this State, 
who in Ohio, and who in Illinois ? 



A. I do not think I heard that matter 
definitely spoken of, except with regard to 
our State, Indiana ; I understood Dodd was 
to be the leader in Indiana. 

Q. Did you hear who was to take care of 
Ohio? 

A. I understood from some source that 
Ohio was to be taken care of by Vallandig 
ham. 

Q. In what event? 

A. In the event of a general uprising. 
He had some forces athis disposal in Canada, 
and would bring those forces into Ohio to 
co-operate with other forces at Cincinnati 
and Louisville. 

Q. From whom did you learn this ? 

A. I can not be positive; my impression 
is that I learned it from Dr. Bowles. 

Q. At this meeting in Chicago you say, do 
you not, that the expenses of the delegates 
were paid by Barrett out of the two million 
dollars that he had received from the South- 
ern Confederacy ? 

A. I understood it was so. 

Q. He paid your expenses, do you say? 

A. Yes, sir. I receipted him for mine 
and Mr. Green's, which I forgot to mention 
yesterday. 

Q. Was that money to be returned or re- 
paid in any way? 

A. No, sir ; not that I understood. 

Q. On what day did you start back from 
Chicago? 

A. I can not be positive as to the day ; 
but I think we were there two days. 

Q. Have you named to the Court all the 
persons that were at that meeting when 
Barrett made that proposition ? 

A. I can not say, but I wiU state now those 
that I can remember: Mr. Barrett, Dr. 
Bowles, Mr. Williams and Judge Bullitt, 
both from Kentucky; and Mr. Piper was 
there. 

Q. Where was he from? 

A. I can not say. 

Q. Did he profess to hold any position in 
the order? 

A. I understood from Dr. Bowles that he 
was a kind of general missionary. 

Q. What does that mean? 

A. A man that was going about diffusing 
a knowledge of the order. 

Q. And carrying light into dark places ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who else was there? , 

A. Mr. Majors, Mr. Swem. 

Q. Who is Mr. Swem ? 

A. A citizen of Chicago. Mr. Walsh, also 
a citizen of Chicago, was present, and Mr. 
HoUoway, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Green and my- 
self 

Q. You say that Mr. Barrett announced 
this as a meeting of the military heads of 
the order; will you state how you happened 
to be present? 

A. I knew nothing of the character of the 
meeting, but Dr. Bowles afterward told me 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



147 



that he had reported me as one of his staff 
officers, and also Mr. Green. 

Q. In what capacity ? 

A. He did not state. 

Q. Then he reported you simply on his 
staff, and you gained access in that way ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was Dodd considered the military 
head of the order ? 

A. He was to be so considered in this 
State, I understood. 

C. What position did Bullitt and Barrett 
hold, militarily? 

A. I did not learn. 

Q. You did not learn the position of any 
of these men then, except that they were 
military chiefs ? 

A. I did not. 

Q. You started back, did you, about July 
23d, 1864 ? 

A. I think I did. 

Q. Was any thing resolved upon at that 
meeting ? 

A. Not that I know of; the discussion was 
not of a definite character in my presence. 

Q. Did they hold any meetings when you 
were not present ? 

A. I suspect they did. 

Q. What made you suspect that ? 

A. Because I saw other men that I did 
not know, and to whom I was not intro- 
duced, in another room, having close con- 
versation. 

Q. Did you learn if Vallandigham was 
expected ? 

A. Judge Bullitt said so. 

Q. Did you understand that any one had 
come from Canada ? 

A. I understood that Mr. Green and Mr. 
Holloway had been to see Vallandigham, 
and that Mr. Dodd had been to Canada to 
see the Commissioners. 

Q. Who came back with you? 

A. Mr. Green, my lady and Dr. Bowles 
were on the same train. 

Q. Did you have any conversation with 
Dr. Bowles after you returned? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you learn of any thing that was 
to be done, or contemplated to be done ? 

A. I understood that Mr. Dodd had 
abandoned the project, and that he had 
sent his son to say that he would drop it. 

Q. At what time did you learn that ? 

A. My best recollection is, that it was 
about two weeks after my return, near the 
7th of August. 

Q. Did you learn why the project had 
been abandoned? 

A. Not definitely. 

Q. Do you know whether any communi- 
cation was attempted to be had, or was had, 
with any rebel forces, commissioners, or 
messengers ? 

A. No, sir, I do not; T heard it spoken of 

Q. By whom? 

A. It was spoken of at the Chicago meet- 



ing; I think Dr. Bowles said messengers 
were sent to the rebels. 

Q. Where were they sent ? 

A. I do not know, sir ; I think they were 
sent into Kentucky and Missouri. 

Q. Do you know with whom communicar 
tion was attempted to be made ? 

A. I inferred it was to be with Price 
and Buckner, because they were to be 
the co-operating forces in case of an upris- 
ing. 

Q. Will you give to this Court, to the best 
of your knowledge, how this uprising was 
to take place, where the rendezvous was lO 
be, and under what circumstances? 

A. It was to take place by the order of 
Mr. Dodd; he was to send out couriers to 
the different commanders of the several 
districts of the State, the major generals of 
the four districts into which the State was 
divided ; and they were to send out cour- 
iers into the respective counties composing 
their several districts, who were to give 
notice of the uprising in their counties, and 
then it was expected that that information 
would be conveyed to certain persons in 
each county that had been prominent and 
leading men of the organization, who were 
to see that it was conveyed to the different 
townships in the county. The general sig- 
nal for the uprising was to be the appear- 
ance of guerrillas or troops in the vicinity 
of St. Louis and Louisville. It might have 
been on the 16th August, or a few days 
later; or, if these couriers got through in 
time, and the Southern forces were to get 
the information, they might appear sooner 
than the 16th. 

Q. To whom were the couriers to go ? 

A. To Generals Buckner and Price. 

Q. Were these couriers to return, and 
then the uprising to take place ? 

A. There was nothing said about their 
returning; the appearance of the troops 
was to be the signal. 

Q. Where were the troops to rendezvous? 

A. The forces of Southern Indiana were 
to be rendezvoused at a place some eight or 
ten miles from New Albany. 

Q. Under whom ? 

A. It was expected they would be under 
Dr. Bowles. 

Q. Where were the forces in this part of 
the State to rendezvous ? 

A. I did not learn that. 

Q. And the forces in Illinois ? 

A. At several points; in the neighborhood 
of Rock Island, Springfield, Chicago, and 
some other points, perhaps. 

Q. Did you learn who was to be the 
leader in that State? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you learn where the rendezvous 
was to take place in Missouri? 

A. I understood that after they had com- 
pleted the seizure of the arsenals in Illi- 
nois, they were to march to St Louis, to co- 



148 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



operate with Price's forces in the taking of 
that place. 

Q. Did you learn what they were to do 
after the rendeivonsiag at the difierent 
points in this State? 

A There was nothing said about it in 
Chicago, but I learned that what was to be 
done in Indiana, was to be under the su- 
pervision of Mr. Dodd. 

Q. What was that? 

A. I did not understand what persons 
were to lead them in particular, but they 
were to be concentrated at Indianapolis, 
and perhaps at Terre Haute, New Albany, 
and Jelfersonville; perhaps Evansville was 
named, I am not positive. The capture of 
the State Capitol at Indianapolis was left, 
as 1 understood, to the special supervision 
of Mr. Dodd, and he was to do it by getting 
up public meetings. There was to be an 
ordinary political meeting called at Indian- 
apolis, as well as I could understand, east 
of the city, at some place of resort for Sab- 
bath school picnics, where water was con- 
venient; as I understood, at some fashion- 
able place for public meetings. I do not 
know whetJ\t;r there is such a place or not. 
It seemed, as well as I could learn, that 
tliere were three places in an easterly di- 
rection, perhaps from Camp Morton; I may 
have misunderstood it, but I give my best 
recollections of it. The three points were 
east of Camp Morton. One meeting would, 
perhaps, be a Sabbath school meeting ; an- 
other a political meeting; and tlie third, 
perhaps, a political meeting — or something 
of that kind; those of the order who as- 
sisted at the meeting, and those wlio were 
members of the organization, would come 
to these meetings in wagons, bringing their 
families; as a general thing, they would 
have arms, secreted in the wagons under 
straw or hay. After arriving at the difier- 
ent points, some one would propose, to be 
in the fashion, that they drill, and they 
were to come out and drill. 

Q. Were they to drill with or without 
arms? 

A. Without arms. The object of the drill 
was, that each individual who was to take 
part in the ali'airs of tlie day, would under- 
stand where his place was, what was his 
duty, and what was expected of him. At 
the time of day when the soldiers came on 
dress parade, at some place east of the 
camp ground, some one at the camp would 
throw up a signal, which would be seen 
from these meeting places; when the signal 
was seen, those who uriderstood what they 
had met there for, would at once seize their 
arms and march imincdiately in the direc- 
tion of Camp Moitfjn. At the time they 
were thus marching, the fences and build- 
ings of Camp Morton were to be tired. It 
was understooil that the released rebel pris- 
oners would particijiate in the aftair, and 
that these rebel soldiers could come up in 



the rear, and that the Federal soldiers, find- 
ing themselves surrounded, would be easily 
overcome. The rebel prisoners would be 
armed with the soldiers' arms, and the sol- 
diers would be held as prisoners of war. 
At the time this was going on — the work 
of freeing prisoners and the capturing these 
soldiers — a detail of persons was to be sent 
to take care of the Governor, and secure 
him; in some way take care of him; and 
then the arsenals at this place were to be 
seized, and a better quality of arms pro- 
cured; those that went on with this expedi- 
tion were to be as fully ai-med from the arse- 
nal as was necessary. They were also to 
take such munitions of war as they thought 
proper with them. They were then to seize 
the railroad to Jeffersonville, and make use 
of the cars for the transportation of troops 
and the rebel prisoners; they were then to 
go on and complete the same work at Jef- 
fersonville and New Albany, and also to co- 
operate in the capture of Louisville. 

Q. That was the general scheme, was 
it? 

A. Yes, sir; a great deal of the minutia I 
may have forgotten; that is my general 
imjiression. 

Q. How extensively was this plan made 
known to the members of the order ? 

A. It was made known to all the mem- 
bers of the order in my county. 

Q. Can you state how extensively in any 
other county? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. What county do you reside in ? 

A. In Washington county? 

Q. Does Mr. Kerr live in your county? 

A. No, sii". 

Q. What prominent men was that scheme 
made known to in your county? 

A. To all the members of the organiza- 
tion. 

Q. How many does the order number 
in your county ? 

A. I can not say ; I think above a thou- 
sand men. 

Q. Was Mr. Hefifren present at the No- 
vember meeting of the Grand Council in 
Indianapolis, that you referred to yester- 
day ? 

A. No, sir. 

Q. Was Mr. Milligan ? 

A. I did not know him at that time. 

Q. Was Dr. Bowles present ? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know Dr. Athon and Mr Eis- 
tine, of this city? 

A. Yes, sir ; I know Dr. Athon. 

Q. Was either present at that meeting ? 

A. I do not think they were, sir. 

Q. Were you ever furnished any money 
for the purchase of arms for this oi'der? 
If so, by whom, and what amount ? 

A. I was furnished with a thousana dol- 
lars by Dr. Bowles, for the purcnuse of 
arms for those of the order who were un 



TREASO^^ TRIALS AT IXDIANAPOLIS. 



149 



derstood to be unable to procure arms 
themselves. 

Q. Were they to be distributed to any 
particular class, or only to members of the 
order? 

A. It was understood that they were to 
be distributed to those who were unable to 
arm themselves. 

Q. Did you make any attempt to pur- 
chase any arms with that thousand dol- 
lars ? 

A. I went to see Mr. Kent, at New Al- 
bany, about the purchase of the arms. 

Q. What did you do with this money? 

A. I gave it out to men to furnish sub- 
stitutes with. 

Q. You loaned it, did you not? 

A. No, sir; I took no note of it: it was 
only an accommodation loan to personal 
friends, to men whom I could trust, and 
from whom I could get it any time I 
needed. 

Q. Then this money was diverted from 
the channel for which it was originally in- 
tended, was it not ? 

A. Yes, sir. 



CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Dr. Bowles told me that he obtained my 
admission to the meeting at Chicago, by 
representing me as a member of his staff; 
that is not true, however; I hold no posi- 
tion in the order. I did not see Milligan, 
Humphreys or Horsey at the Chicago meet- 
ing; nor did I get any information of the 
contemplated uprising from either of the 
accused, save Dr. Bowles. I never spoke to 
Mr. Horsey in my life ; Mr. Humphreys I 
have seen but once, having passed the com- 
pliments of the day with him at the Chi- 
cago Convention; with Mr. Milligan I 
became acquainted at the State Con- 
vention here in July. From what I saw 
during the Chicago meeting, I was led to 
think that there was a meeting inside of 
the one I was permitted to witness. There 
were many schemes proposed for carrying 
out the uprising, the release of prisoners, 
etc., but the one I have given in my direct 
testimony was that which was deemed 
most plausible, and most likely to be 
adopted; but I do not know that it was 
resolved upon. 

The thousand dollars I received from Dr. 
Bowles for the purchase of arms, he gave 
me to understand, was from his private 
funds: and what he said impressed me 
with that idea. 

I have been under arrest; but no induce- 
ment or promise of favor has been held out 
to me by the authorities to induce me to 
testify against the defendants in this case; 
neither has promise of immunity from 
punishment been held out to me, as an 
inducement to testify; nor has any one 
visited me while in confinement to ascer- 
tain what I could testifv to. Not until 



12 o'clock yesterday, did I know that T 
should be required as a witness ; the guard 
then informed me that I was required in 
the court room. 

Q. Did you tell any one after you were 
arrested, and before you were called upon, 
what your testimony would be? 

Question objected to by the Judge Ad- 
vocate, and withdrawn. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

It was distinctly stated to me before tes- 
tifying, that the Government authorities 
would make me no pledges, nor did any 
Government official make any threats to 
me. The only position I held in the order 
was that of Ancient Brother in our County 
Temple. Dr. Bowles told me that he 
would appoint me to the positioa of 
Adjutant General on his staff, if 1 desired 
it; but I told him T did not wish it, as 
I had no knowledge of military mat- 
ters. I and Mr. Heffren had some talk 
about it. The organization, which I after- 
ward understood to be the Sons of Liberty, 
was in session in Chicago at the time of 
the Democratic Convention, when General 
McClellan was nominated. The meeting 
was at the Richmond House; Mr. Dodd 
was there. I was there, but not as a dele- 
gate ; there were no persons there to repre- 
sent the South, or from Canada, to my 
knowledge. Mr. Moss, from Missouri, was 
there, and distinguished himself in the 
meeting; Mr. Green, from Illinois, was 
there; and a Mr. Jackson, I believe — a 
large man — from Ohio; and also Mr. Val- 
landigham, who acted as Chairman of the 
meeting of the Sons of Liberty. I was 
present at only a portion of each meeting. 
When I first went, Mr. Moss was speaking. 
An introductory speech was made by Mr. 
Vallandigham, as Chairman. He spoke in 
reference to the divided condition of the 
Democratic party; he said that until very 
recently he had thought that the Chicago 
Convention would result very much as the 
Charleston Convention did; that is, that it 
would break up; but since he had come to 
Chicago, and had seen persons from all parts 
of the country, he had changed his opinion 
on that subject; he had found a wonderful 
unanimity of fooling, and oneness of idea, 
and he believed the party could be made 
more united and more efficient than it had 
been for years; and he did not doubt we 
would be able, through his and others' in- 
strumentality, to secure a proper platform 
for the party to stand upon. Vallandig- 
ham acted as Chairman until the close of 
the meeting, and adjourned it to the next 
day, when he presided again. The meeting 
was held at the Richmond House; I think 
the rooms were Nos. 94, 96, 98, and 100, in 
the fifth story; there were folding-doors by 
which the rooms communicated; and prob- 
ably from one hundred and fifty to two 



150 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



hundred were present. Dodd was there, and I 
think Mr. Barrett. I did not see Judge Bul- 
litt, or Mr. Piper, or Captain Majors. I saw 
Mr. Swem in Chicago, but not at the meeting. 
]\Ir. Vallandigham presided at the meeting 
by a vote. I did not know but that the 
meetings were open, for no one was present 
at the doors, and no password was required 
tliat I know of, nor did I know that all pres- 
ent were members. Mr. Moss, in his re- 
marks, gave a history of the condition of 
Missouri; how the citizens there were ex- 
posed to both rebel and Union troops; that 
some really good Union men, and others 
really rebels, were sutiering great indignities 
at the hands of the troops. First the rebels 
would come along and rob them of their 
pork and crops; then the Union troops 
came and took the negroes; that if this 
organization was worth any thing, if it was 
intended to be efficient in the restoration 
of the Government under the Constitution, 
now was the time to strike; that these 
indignities were unbearable, and if they 
had true American blood in them they 
would not bear it any longer, but strike at 
once. 

No practical remedy was proposed to 
meet the emergency. The first meeting 
was held on Sunday evening, the second on 
Monday. On the Monday evening going to 
the Richmond House, somewhat before the 
meeting, I met John Singleton and Mr. 
Barrett, of Missouri. They were endeavor- 
ing, so I understood, to arrange for the burst- 
ing up of the Convention, in case it dis- 
owned the order. In that event they would 
make a public demonstration of the order, 
and proposed to nominate some candidates 
other than that nominated by the Conven- 
tion. John Singleton had a great many 
mottoes for transparencies made, some of 
which he read. They were patriotic, and 
not connected with any secret conspiracy; 
.some of them vv,ere mottoes from the 
speeches and writings of Douglas, Jackson, 
Jefferson and Washington; but they were 
phrases which seemed to suit the circum- 
stances of the times. At this second meet- 
ing Vallandigham pi'esidcd, and made some 
remarks similar to those he made at the 
first meeting. He drew out of his pocket a 
platform, substantially the same as that 
adopted at the Chicago Convention, which, 
he said, he had presented to most of the dele- 
gates, and to members from each of the 
States, and that it had met with universal 
approval. H he could get that platfoim as 
the platform of the party, he should be wil- 
ling to take McClellan as the Presidential 
candidate. He said he would be willing to 
take any man as a candidate if the platform 
was only right. He aimnuuced his convic- 
tion that, by the adojjtiun of this platform, 
the organization woulil merge its action 
with that of the Democratic party. Single- 
ton's proposition was not adopted, in conse- 



quence of the Democratic party being 
united. This meeting of the organization 
in Chicago, at which Barrett made his prop- 
osition for an uprising, was on the 20th of 
July; the second meeting was on the 29th 
of August. Barrett, who was present at the 
meeting, at which Vallandigham presided, 
made no objection to the course of the pro- 
ceedings on that occasion. Mr. Dodd was 
present at the July meeting. The speeches 
made at the meeting at which Vallandig- 
ham presided, I thought, were addressed to 
those who were members of the order, ijklr. 
Green, of Hlinois, made a speech at the 
meeting. I have no recollection that the 
strength of the order was mentioned by any 
present who seemed to know; but one pei-- 
son said it had about five hundred thousand 
members. The organization was referred 
to by Mr. Moss, and others, as a distinctive 
organization then existing. Mr. Vallandig- 
ham presided when these statements were 
made. 

RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I did not understand that this meeting 
was a mere caucus of the friends of Mr. 
Vallandigham, to consider matters that 
would probably come up at the Convention. 
The gentlemen who were present at Chicago. 
representing the Sons of Liberty, were 
unanimously opposed to the nomination of 
General McClellan. The Mr. Barrett, of 
whom I have spoken, is from Missouri. He 
stated to me that early in this war, Mr. 
Douglas had suggested to him the propriety 
of getting up a regiment, and going on the 
Plains to hold in check marauding bands 
which might congregate there, in the terri- 
tory; that he had got up a regiment, and 
went down to the neighborhood of Pilot 
Knob, Missouri. Mr. Douglas had promised 
to get some order for him, but failing to do 
this ho had resigned. Since then he had 
been engaged in sending persons across the 
lines to the Southern Confederacy. I think 
before the war, he was a resident of Hlinois, 
and since raising the regiment he has 
made claim to Missouri as his State. 

W. S. Bush, a witness for the Government, 
was then introduced, and duly sworn by the 
Judge Advocate. 

The Judge Advocate proposed to intro- 
duce a speech, as reported by the witness, 
and printed in the Cincinnati Gazette^ of 
August 10, 18G4, which was made by tho 
accused, L. P. Milligan. Some parts of the 
reportwcre verbatim, and others a condensed 
report ; and he proposed to examine the wit/- 
ness in reference to its correctness. 

The accused objected to its introduction 
as incompetent, and claimed that a witness 
must first state his recollection of a speech, 
or conversation, and might refresh hi.s 
memoi-y by any memorandum made at the 
time; but that report could not be used as 
evidence. It was not competent to intro- 



TREASON TRIALS AT mDIANAPOLIS. 



151 



duce a report which was only partially ver- 
batim, in which the omissions might give 
a different construction to what was said, 
and to ask the witness to define what was 
verbatim, and what was not. 

The Judge Advocate replied : 

It seems to me that it is a well established 
rule that a printed report of a speech, pub- 
lished in a public journal at the time it was 
made, the reporter being pres-ent to state 
whether the report of the speech is or is 
not correct, can always be introduced in 
evidence. I recollect a somewhat similar 
question occurred in the trial of Captain 
Hurtt, at Cincinnati, which was strongly 
argued by his able counsel, T. D. Lincoln 
and Colonel Jackson. I had introduced, 
on the part of the Government, private 
letters which had been written by him, 
containing disloyal sentiments, or senti- 
ments tending to injure the Government; 
p,nd, to rebut the force of those letters, his 
counsel proposed to introduce articles writ- 
ten by him and printed in the Ohio State 
Journal^ of which he was one of the editors, 
showing that he had labored, by his speeches 
and in the leading articles of his paper, to 
advocate the general cause of the Govern- 
ment. We were unable to keep that evi- 
dence out, although we contested it with as 
much force as we were able. During this 
trial we have introduced an address of H. 
H. Dodd, in printed form, which was de- 
livered as a speech to the order at one of 
their meetings in February, and no objec- 
tion was made by the accused or their coun- 
sel. 

The counsel for the accused replied: 

The address of Mr. Dodd was published 
as a correct official report of" his speech, 
while the correctness of the report of Mr. 
Milligan's speech is not yet proven. 

The Judge Advocate continued : 

The gentlemen now make the issue on 
the correctness of the report, and not on 
the right to introduce the report of that 
speech. 1 allow the whole force of his ar- 
gument to the effect that it is not compe- 
tent to introduce it as a correct report. 
Now, then, I propose to show that the speech, 
as reported in that paper, is a correct re- 
port, and to prove its correctness by the man 
who reported it. 

It may, perhaps, be said that it would 
be better to introduce the original itself 
It is a rule that the highest grade of testi- 
mony shall be introduced which it is pos- 
sible to obtain, or which the case in its 
nature is susceptible of; but when the 
original notes can not be produced, is it not 
better to go to the printed report of the 
speech than to trust to the uncertain mem- 
ory of any witness? 

The President of the Commission said 
the document referred to as the address of 
the Grand Comirander to the Grand Coun- 
cil, came to us in the shape of an ofiBcial 



document, in the minutes of the order. 
This report purports to be a speech made 
by one of the accused, and published vo 
the newspapers of the country, and oniy 
when its identity is proven Ls it compe- 
tent in evidence. 

The Judge Advocate replied: 

One is a speech made in an official capa- 
city, and the other is simply an ordinary 
speech to the masses. We can introduce 
the admissions and speeches of a man, made 
upon any and all occasions as against him- 
self, if necessary. I propose to introduce it, if 
for no other purpose than to show that while 
the accused was a member of this order, 
knowing its intents and purposes, and 
while this order was being agitated with 
plans for the release of rebel prisoners, 
marching upon Indianapolis, Louisville, New 
Albanj'and other places, and attempting to 
overturn the Government, the accused was 
abroad through the land addressing bodies 
of men, and making incendiary speeches 
certain to have the effect of arousing 
their passions, and inciting to insurrec 
tion. 

The counsel for the accused said": 

The address comes in the character of 
an official document, while the other ia 
that of a reported speech. The charac- 
ter of these two seems very different. 

The Judge Advocate replied : 

I introduce the first document not as 
an official document, in and of itself. We 
first had the testimony of Mr. Harrison as 
to whether it was a correct copy of Mr. 
Dodd's speech, and whether Mr. Dodd de- 
livered it at that time. It was only because 
it was a correct copy that we were entitled 
to introduce it. 

I desire to introduce that paper itself, 
and to submit to the Commission the report 
of the speech, as a correct report of the 
speech, and the very words used by the ac- 
cused. 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberating. 

On the opening of the Court, the Judge 
Advocate announced to the accused that 
the Court had decided that the objection 
was premature at the present stage of the 
examination of the witness, and the objec- 
tion was overruled. 

The witness, in reply to the questions of 
the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : 

You may state whether you were present 
at a convention at Fort Wayne, Indiana, 
on the 13th of August, and if so, whether 
or not you reported any speeches made at 
that time ? 

Answer. I was present at that meeting 
and made a full report of Mr. Milligan's 
speech, and partial reports of the speeches 
of A. M. Jackson, of Ohio, and C. W. Eeeves, 
of Plymouth, Marshall county. 

Q. What was your occupation at that 
time? 



152 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



A. I was reporting for the Cincinnati Ga- 
zette the speeches made at i^olitical meet- 
ings of both parties in Indiana. 

Q. Did you at that time make a report 
of Mr. Milligan's speech? 

A. I did ; Mr. Milligan's speech was made 
on Saturday. I wrote my report on Sun- 
day in part or in whole, and returned to 
Cincinnati Monday morning. 

Q. Did you take short hand notes of that 
speech at the time it was delivered? 

A. I did, sir. 

Q. How large an audience was present ? 

A. I estimated it at five thousand persons. 

Q. Have you looked at your notes or at 
the report in the paper, to refresh your 
memory ? 

A. My notes were destroyed at the time 
the report was made. I have seen the re- 
port since, but have not carefully examined 
it to refresh my memory. 

Q. Do you now recollect the main points 
of that speech ? 

A. I do, sir. 

Q. State to the Court what was said by 
Mr. Milligan on the state of the country, 
whether it was prosperous or otherwise ? 

A. He referred to the countiy as desola- 
ted by this war, and the oppressions of the 
Administration. That was the general 
tenor of his remarks on that point. 

Q. What did he state in reference to 
the freedom of the press and of speech ? 

A. He spoke of the freedom of speech 
allowed as simply that granted by a Lin- 
coln mob — as a freedom in name rather 
than in fact. 

Q,. What did he say in reference to the 
draft or conscription? 

A. Prior to Mr. Milligan's speech, a series 
of resolutions was adopted as the platform of 
the Democracy of that Congressional dis- 
trict and of adjoining districts. The audi- 
ence were expecting to hear from him in 
reference to the draft. He stated, if the 
war was right, the draft was right, and if 
they considered the war right, and were 
good citizens, they would not grumble 
about the draft. 

Q. What else did he say about the right- 
fulness of the war? 

A. He denied that the war was right, 
and proceeded to argue, that under the 
Constitution the President had no power to 
coerce a State, and asked if those entered 
the army would look in the future for 
their laurels to such battles as Bull liun, 
Chicamauga, and Red river. He also ap- 
pealed to them to consider the condition 
of their wives and children at home, des- 
titute and dependent on the charity of 
tlieir neighbors, if they entered the army, 
and asked whether they considered it a 
duty to make such a sacrifice. 

Q. State to the Court what he said about 
the powers that be; whether they were ex- 
isting by rightful authority or otherwise? 



A. I do not recollect his exact words, but 
the tenor of his remark.? were that the 
Administration had usur^sed power. 

Q. What did he say about the President 
of the United States ? 

A. He spoke of him as a tyrant, and an 
usurper, I think. 

Q. What did he say in reference to the 
arrests of disloyal persons bj' the Govern- 
ment? 

A. I do not remember distinctly the 
words he used. 

Q. Did he denounce arbitrary arrests? 

A. I think he did. 

Q. What did he say about this war being 
inaugurated for the restoration of the 
Union, and its power to act in that di- 
rection ? 

A. He held that the war itself was dis- 
union, and that the Union could not be re- 
stored by war. 

Q. How did he treat this Government, as 
a unit or otherwise ? 

A. He spoke of the Government as a 
confederation of the several States, rather 
than a unity. 

Q. What effect did he state the war had 
produced? 

A. That it had made the Government a 
despotism.' 

Q. How did you understand him to speak 
of the Government at that time, as a Gov- 
ernment of all the States, or only of the 
States which were left in the Union? 

A. I understood him to refer to what were 
left. 

Q. What did he say as to whether the 
Government was still divided or existing as 
a unit? 

A. He treated the war itself as a dissolu- 
tion of the Government. 

Q. Did he make that statement? 

A. I think he did. 

Q. Give to the Court his words as near as 
you can recollect. 

A. I have not referred to the report lately 
for the purpose of refreshing my memory, 
and can not fitate positively what he said. 

Q. What did he state as to the right of 
the Government of the United States to 
make war upon rebels, or those in rebellion 
against the General Government? 

A. He denied the right. 

Q. Did he state any thing to the audience 
in reference to the number of men who had 
been destroyed in this war, and the amount 
of treasure exjiended ? 

A. I think ho stated that two millions of 
men had lost their lives during the war. I do 
not remember exactly what he said in ref- 
erence to the amount of treasure expended, 
but I believe lie referred to it. 

Q. What did he state about the prospects 
of the war after that expenditure, as regards 
the two contending forces? 

A. He spoke of the Confederate Govern- 
ment as successful, as holding its own ; and 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



153 



that the future prosecution of the war would 
only tend to greater losses to the United 
States Government. 

Q. I will ask you now this general ques- 
tion, whether his speech at that time was 
loyal, and in favor of the Government, or 
whether it was disloyal, and against it? 

Question objected to by the counsel for the 
accused. 

The Judge Advocate stated that he could 
produce ample authority in favor of the com- 
petency of the question. 

The Commission then adjourned to Wed- 
nesday, November 16, at 10 o'clock, A. M. 



Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
November 16, 1804, 10 o'clock, A. M. / 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused, (except W. 
A. Bowles,) and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

The Judge Advocate then submitted the 
following in favor of the competency of the 
question objected to yesterday, by the ac- 
cused : 

When the last witness was upon the 
stand, the accused objected that it was not 
competent evidence for the witness to state 
whether the general tenor of Mr. Milligan's 
speech was loyal, or disloyal. 

My duties have given me but little time 
to search for authoriiics on the point at 
issue, and 1 have not been able to find a 
large number of decisions applicable to the 
issue made by the accused. 1 remember 
very distinctly, in the commencement of 
this trial, investigating the general prin- 
ciple of conspiracy, and found the proposi- 
tion broadly stated, in so many words, that 
you could ask a witness who heard a speech 
made by a conspirator to an audience, of 
which the witness was part, whether the 
general purport and tenor of the speech was 
against the Government or for it. 

I read first a })aragraph not so applicable 
as others to the question at issue, but for 
the purpose of bringing to the mind of the 
Court the class of evidence that may be in- 
troduced in trials of this character, I read 
from Roscoe's Oriminal Evidence, page 87: 

"Not only are the acte, and the written 
letters and papers, of one of several persons 
engaged in the same conspiracy, evidence 
against the others, if done or written in fur- 
therance of the common purpose, but his 
verbal declarations are equally admissible 
under similar restrictions. Any declarations 
made by one of the party in pursuance of 
the common object of the conspiracy, are 
evidence against the re*t of the party, who 
are as much responsible for all that has been 
said or done by their associates in carrying 
into effect the concerted plan, as if it had 
been pronounced by their own voice, or exe- 



cuted by their own hand. These declara- 
tions are of the nature of acts; they are in 
reality acts done by the party, and gen- 
erally they are far more mischievous than acts 
which consist only in corporal agency. All 
consultations, therefore, carried on by one 
conspirator, relative to the general design, 
and all conversations in his presence, are 
evidence against another conspirator, though 
absent. 1 Phill. Ev., 95, 1th ed. The etfect 
of such evidence must depend on a variety 
of circumstances, such as whether the party 
was attending to the conversation, and 
whether he approved or disapproved; still 
such conversations are admissible in evi- 
dence. See El/re C. J., Hardy s case, 24 Hoiv. 
St. Tr., 704. In Lord George Gordon's case, 
the cry of the mob, being part of the trans- 
action, was held to be admissible against the 
prisoner. 21 How. St. Tr., 535. And upon 
the same principle, the expressions of the 
mob in the Sacheverell riots, that they de- 
signed to pull down the meeting-houses, 
were admitted in evidence. Damorees case, 
15 How. St. Tr., 552." 

I read this to bring before the minds of 
the Court the general principle of con- 
spiracy. On page 88, Roscoe's Criminal Evi- 
dence, I find the following : 

"As in trials for conspiracies, whatever 
the prisoner may have done or said at any 
meeting alleged to be held in pursuance of 
the conspiracy, is admissible in evidence on 
the part of the prosecution against him ; so, 
on the other hand, any other part of his 
conduct at the same meetings, will be 
allowed to be proved on his behalf For 
the intention and design of a party at a 
particular time are best explained by a 
complete view of every part of his conduct 
at that time, and not merely from the proof 
of a single and insulated act or declai'ation. 
Fhill. Ev., 499, 8/A ed. On the trial for an 
indictment to overthrow the Government, 
evidence was given to show that the con- 
spiracy was brought into overt act at meet- 
ings, in the presence of the prisoner Walker. 
His counsel was allowed to ask, whether at 
those times, he had heard Walker utter any 
word inconsistent with the duty of a good 
subject. He was also allowed to inquire 
into the general declarations of the prisoner 
at the meetings, and* whether the witness 
had heard him say any thing that had a 
tendency to disturb the peace. Ibid., 23 How. 
St. Tr., 1131; 31 /(/., 43." 

I do not propose to go into any lengthy 
discussion of this subject, as I have drawn 
from the witness the main points of the 
speech. I am certain, however, that the law 
goes further than I have even claimed. That 
1 have the right to ask whether Mr. Milli- 
gan, in talking to that crowd, spoke for or 
against the Government, is conceded by the 
authorities; and each loyal man of the land 
is perfectly cognizant of what is loyalty, and 
what is disloyalty. This is not a question 



154 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



of opinion, but one of fact. It is an old re- 
mark that every man is for his Government 
or against it. The dividing hne is clear to 
the mind of every man veho heard that 
speech. Now, I propose to ask the witness 
who reported that speech, whether it was 
for the Government, or against it. There 
on the 13th of August, when the uprising 
was to take place on the 16th, he was 
making an incendiary speech, at the very 
time when Dr. Wilson testifies that nearly 
every man in his county belonging to the 
order knew that the insurrection was to 
take place on the 16th of August. 

The accused replied: 

I have not had an opportunity to search 
the law upon this point, but it seems to me 
it does not support the point made by the 
Judge Advocate. He states that this speech 
was made a few days previous to the time 
when this uprising was to take place. The 
exposition of the order was made on the 
29th of July, and the testimony given 
shows that the whole project was aban- 
doned, and that messengers had been dis- 
patched to the people making that an- 
nouncement. Instead of that speech being 
made to goad on the minds of the people, 
it was made at the time when this uprising 
had been set at naught, abandoned, and 
the whole thing exposed in the public 
print. If Mr. Milligan had knowledge of 
this uprising, it is fair to presume that he 
had knowledge of its abandonment. It is 
said that this speech was made for the pur- 
pose of inflaming the minds of the popu- 
lace; but that is a matter for the considera- 
tion of the Court in summing up the case. 
It is competent for the prosecution to ask 
the witness the general question, "Was that 
speech loyal, and in favor of the Govern- 
ment, or disloyal, and against the Govern- 
ment ?" 

You will notice that Walker had ex- 
pressed no sentiments ; and when the Gov- 
ernment undertook to prove his sentiments, 
he had the right to object, that the Govern- 
ment could prove intents only by affirma- 
tive acts, and not by mere opinions. We 
may, on the contrary, introduce evidence to 
show that his sentiments were not disloyal, 
and propose to prove that he made no re- 
mark tending to such a conclusion as that. 
If they will ask the witness what was the 
substance oi' liis remarks, in regard to obe- 
dience to the Constitution and the draft, or 
against enforcing the dralt, I make no ob- 
jection; but they can not ask the witness 
whether the whole sj)eech was in favor of 
the Government, and loyal, or against the 
Government, and disloyal. Look at the 
fallacy of such a position. There is not a 
speech made, but what you can find an in- 
dividual who will come up and swear that 
it is disloyal; and, on the other hand, you 
could find some Democrat who would swear 
that the tendency of the speech was loyal 



and in favor of the Constitution. I take 
for granted the witness would say the 
speech was disloyal ; and, I dare say, a Dem- 
ocrat would say it was calculated to main- 
tain the Constitution. You, gentlemen of 
the Commission, are to decide what this 
tendency is. The prisoner is charged with 
disloyal practices, and the opinion of the 
witness as to the effect of his speech, 
whether disloyal or not, is not competent 
evidence. Most of the members of this 
Commission are lawyers; and they know 
that it is a question at one time mooted, 
how the damages were to be ascertained in' 
a case of actual slander. The facts must 
be given to the jury, and they must fix the 
amount. So the facts in regard to this 
speech, the declarations must be given to 
the Court, and they must decide whether it 
is loyal or not. It is a matter of political 
controversy, whether the Administration is 
or is not the Government. Some would in- 
sist that every thing said against the Ad- 
ministration, is disloyalty to the Govern- 
ment. Other witnesses would say that the 
Administration is only one-third part of the 
Government. We would, therefore, have 
to inquire of the witness what his political 
views were, to understand what he meant 
by loyalty. 

Mr. Greenleaf, in treating upon the sub- 
ject of evidence in courts-martial, lays down 
the same general considerations by which 
courts of law are governed. 

He says, in paragraph 476: 

"It has already been intimated that 
courts-martial are bound, in general, to ob- 
serve the rules of the law of evidence by 
which the courts of criminal jurisdiction 
are governed. The onlj' exceptions which 
are permitted, are those which are of neces- 
sity created by the nature of the service, and 
by the constitution of the court and its 
course of proceeding." 

Again, paragraph 478, he says: 

" The opinions of witnesses are, perhaps, 
more frequently called for in military trials 
than in any others; but the rule which 
governs their admissibility, is the same here 
as elsewhere, and has already been stated 
in a preceding volume. But it is proper 
here to add, that where the manner of the 
act, or of the language with which the pris- 
oner is charged, is essential to the oftense, 
as whether the act was menacing or insult- 
ing, or cowardly, or unskillful, or not; or 
whether the language was abusive or sar- 
castic, or playful, the opinion which the 
witness formed at the time, or the imjires- 
sion it then made upon his mind, being 
cotemporaneous with the fact, and parta- 
king of the res ffcsicc, is not only admissible, 
but is a fact in the case which he is bound 
to testify." 

Just so here. The facts are before the 
Court. Is it fair to receive the opinion of 
the witness upon the general tenor of the 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



155 



speech as to its loyalty or disloyalty? You, 
gentlemen of the Cc^mission, are thor- 
oughly versed in the politico of the day, and 
quite as competent to decide wiiether these 
declarations are loyal or disloyal, as is the 
witness. 

The court room was then cleared for delib- 
erating on the objection of the accused. 

On reopening the court room, the Judge 
Advocate announced that the objection 
had been sustained, and the question over- 
ruled. 

Question by the Judge Advocate : 
Please state to the Court whether at that 
time you had any conversation with Mr. 
Milligan. 

Answer. I do not know that I had any 
conversation with him the day of the meet- 
ing, but I did the day after. 

Q. Did Mr. Milligan know, at the time he 
made that speech, what was the action of 
the State Central Committee at their meet- 
ing on the 12th and 13th of August ? 

A. I learned from another gentleman 
what the action of the committee had been, 
and I asked Mr. Milligan if he had heard 
of their action. He answered that he had 
not. I then told him that General Manson 
had been nominated as Lieutenant Gov- 
ernor. He seemed surprised, and remarked 
that it looked as if it had been done to 
spite us. 

Q. That was the next day after his speech 
was made, was it not ? 

A. It was on Sunday afternoon. 
Q. When did Mr. Milligan make this 
speech? 

A. On Saturday afternoon, August 13th, 
1864. 

Q. Do you mean the Saturday preceding 
your conversation with Mr. Milligan ? 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did Mr. Milligan say at that 
meeting in reference to the draft ? Did he 
advise the people to submit and aid the 
Government in the enrollment, or did he 
advise them to oppose it? 

A. Nothing was said about the enroll- 
ment. 

Q. Was any thing said about the draft ? 
A. The draft was expected on the 5th 
of September, 1864. This meeting was on 
the 13th of August. He spoke in favor of 
the draft as the best mode of getting sol- 
diers. He said if the war was right, the 
draft was right ; but the war was wrong, and 
the draft was wrong; and he spoke of those 
who went into the army as making a sacri- 
fice of life instead of a risk. 

Q. Will you give the substance of his re- 
marks and the manner in wliich he spoke 
about the war? 

A. I think he spoke about the war as un- 
justifiable, and a dishonorable war. I am 
not positive about the word dishonorable. 

Q. What did he say upon the subject of 
peace and of quitting fighting ? 



A. He was in favor of stopping hostilities, 
and allowing the South the terms she had 
always asked. 

Q. What were those terms? 

A. To be let alone. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 



The meeting referred to was a Demo- 
cratic mass meeting, called by the Peace 
Democracy to take action in regard to the 
draft. I learned this first from Captain 
Bracken, who said that he learned it from 
Mr. Barry, who was acting as correspond- 
ent of the Chicago Times. I understood 
that on the morning of the meeting there 
had been a caucus there, composed of indi- 
viduals who were opposed to adopting any 
resolution as their platform, as well as of 
those who were in favor of adopting it. 
After the radical peace men carried their 
point in regard to the adoption of resolu- 
tions, I understood that those withdrew. 
The convention numbered about five thou- 
sand. I went to that meeting as the repor- 
ter for the Cincinnati Gazette. I was not in 
the employment of the Government at the 
time. I sent a telegraphic dispatch of Mr. 
Milligan's speech to the Cincinnati Gazette^ 
which was confined mainly to the resolu- 
tions adopted. The report of the nioeting, 
as well as the telegraphic dispatch of the 
resolutions, was made by me. I called Kv. 
Milligan "Dr. Milligan," because I had thus 
heard him spoken of In his speech he said 
the war was an unjustifiable and unconstitu- 
tional one. Then he spoke of the draft, and 
appealed to his hearers in regard to makin.» 
a sacrifice of life, and of the comforts and 
happiness of their families, and then asked 
them if they thought it best to gr> into the 
army. In making this argument, he ap- 
pealed to his audience for approval, and 
they indorsed what he said. He said if the 
war was right, the draft was right; and he 
said that the draft was the best method for 
raising men. I can not say that he advis(ui 
submission to the draft. He said that 
those who believed the war was right ought 
to go, and not growl about the draft. He 
did not discuss party difl:erences; but in 
his remarks he opposed the war and the 
Government; his remarks against the Gov- 
ernment were loudly cheered. In speak- 
ing of the Administration, I do not remem- 
ber his referring to the difterent depart- 
ments of the Executive; 1 understood him 
to speak of the Government as a whole : 
and he did not single out any one or 
any department, except, perhaps, the Presi- 
dent. He said nothing denunciatory of 
the Constitution, but the whole tenor of 
his speech was in fiivor of the Constitution 
as he construed it. His construction of it per- 
mitted States to secede at will, and denied to 
the Government the right of coercion. The 
resolutions adopted referred more to the 
draft, and were denunciatory of it and the 



156 



IJIEASON TRIALS AT ETOIANAPOLIS. 



war generally, rather than to its having influ- 
ence upon the Chicago Convention. The 
name of the Chairman of the Committee on 
Resolutions was Mr. O'Rourke. I was not 
present at the convention that met in the 
morning. The resolutions were reported to 
the meeting before the speaking began; 
they were first in order. I understood Mr. 
Milligan to say that about two millions of 
men had fallen in this war. He spoke of 
two million seven hundred thousand men 
having gone into the army and made a sac- 
rifice of life, while the rebels still held their 
own; and my deduction was that the 
great majority of them had lost their lives. 
He said that while the Government had 
called out two million seven hundred thou- 
sand men, we were not able to make any 
lieadway, while the rebels were holding 
their own. At the time of the meeting, 1 
intended to give a full report of all the 
points of the speech in Mr. Milligan's own 
language, condensing his references to Colo- 
nial history, and his discussion of the con- 
stitutional right of coercion, and perhaps 
some minor points; otherwise, I think the 
report is correct, and many parts of it are 
verbatim. I consider the report more re- 
liable than my recollection of the meeting. 
1 wrote my report partly or wholly on 
Sunday, and it was printed in the Gazette 
on the Tuesday following. I glanced over 
the report when it appeared in the paper, 
and I recognized it as the one I had made. 
Mr. Milligan did not perhaps say, in so 
many words, that the President liad not 
the power to coerce the rebels; he was 
speaking of the right of the Government 
to subdue sovereign States, and my conclu- 
sion was that those were rebellious States. 
1 think he spoke of the right to coerce 
sovereign States, and the right to coerce 
people who had chosen to leave the Union, 
referring not only to the States, but to the 
people; and he may have been talking 
about the right of revolution. I think he 
denied not only the right to coerce States, 
but individuals also. The character of the 
paper for which I was reporting is that of a 
general newspaper; I do not regard it as a 
partisan newspaper, and do not think it 
claims to be the organ of anj' party. It 
may have been regarded as a Republican 
paper; it certainly is in favor of the Union. 
Since I have been acquainted with it, it has 
taken an independent course, and has sup- 
ported the Union candidates whenever its 
editors saw fit to support them, and ap- 
proved or criticised the Administration 
whenever they thouglit they had reason 
for .so doing. I have no recoUection of Mr. 
Milligan or any other speaker being clieered 
for speaking in favor ol' the (iovernment. 
In addition to Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Jaclcson 
and Mr. Read spoke at that meeting, and 
were all cheered; and Mr. Humphreys was 
loudlv cheered when he took the stand. 



Mr. Milligan was cheered not only «7lien 
he spoke against tb ^ policy of the Govern- 
ment, but also wnen he spoke against the 
war; 1 do not make any distinction be- 
tween the Government and the Administra- 
tion; Mr. Milligan's speech was an argu- 
mentative one, and contained many points 
calculated to draw out the approval of the 
audience. My present connection with 
the Government is only as one of the Re- 
corders to this Commission. I have acted 
with both parties. I acted with the Demo- 
cratic party in 1859. I voted for Mr. Lincoln. 

Q. Was there any thing more denuncia- 
tory of the Administration in Mr. Milligan's 
remarks than in the remarks of the other 
gentlemen who spoke there on thnt day? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

There was, perhaps, nothing more offen- 
sive in Mr. Milligan's speech than there i» 
in the average of Democratic speeches de- 
livered during the present campaign. There 
might have been less abuse in Mr. Milligan's 
speech than in some other speeches that 
have been delivered, and more than in 
others. 

EE-EXAMINATION. 

Mr. Milligan in his speech that day used 
the term Government rather than Adminis- 
tration, and I do not recollect his making 
any distinction between the Governmentand 
the Adminstration. He said that if the war 
was right, the draft was right; but he denied 
that the war had been, or could be consti- 
tutional and right. 

Nicholas CornuANE, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows : 

I reside in Jackson township, Sullivan 
county, Indiana. I am acquainted with Mr 
Humphreys, one of the accused. I have 
seen him a few times. I reside nine or ten 
miles from him. 1 heard Mr. Humphreys 
on one occasion speak in Jackson township. 
The occasion was said to be a Democratic 
picnic. I think it was about the I5th of 
September, 1863, a year ago; at any rate, it 
was the day ^fter Mr. Collins was shot in 
Terre Haute by Mr. Bi'own. Mr. Hum- 
phreys spoke of that in my hearing. There 
might have been three hundred people, 
more or less, present; the meeting was out 
of doors. .Mr. Humphreys was standing in 
a wagon-bed. Besides Mr. Humphreys, there 
were Mr. Hammil, an attorney at law, Mr. 
Edward Price, and an attoiney named Bur- 
ton, be.'^ides another person whose name I 
do not know. Tliis hitler said he was a rebel 
from the State of (leorgia, I beheve. He 
said he did not know why he was required 
to speak to the audience there, composed as 
it was mostly of farmers, unless it was that 
they had heard a great deal about rebels 
and had never seen one, and that he was a 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



157 



rebel from Georgia. Mr. Humphreys was pres- 
ent when the rebel spoke. Mr. Humphreys 
made the first speech, and a short one again 
afterward. I remember that he criticised the 
A.dministration somewhat strongly. He 
seemed to be solicitous for peace, and to be 
opposed to the war; and he seemed to think 
that the Democratic party was imposed 
upon, and ought to stand up for their 
rights. He said that the time had come 
when Democrats should not appropriate 
their money, or be willing to spend their 
means in levity, but should be preparing for 
self-defense. The general run of his speech 
was in opposition to the present Adminis- 
tration. The rebel from the State of Georgia 
remarked that he was not concerned about 
our State policy, for he did not belong to 
our State ; but he had a piece of advice that 
he would give to his friends, and that was, 
to resist the present abolition Administra- 
tion at the sacrifice of their means, their fami- 
lies, and themselves, if necessary; and that 
for nothing short of that would he call them 
honorable. I can not say particularly 
whether these remarks called forth appro- 
bation or disapprobation. There were sev- 
eral cheers, and the people said that he was 
a good-looking fellow; he was considerably 
cheered at the close of his speech. I do not 
remember hearing any hissing or any marks 
of disapprobation at any thing he said. Mr. 
Hammil, Mr. Burton, Mr. Allen and Mr. 
Humphreys were in the wagon, but I am 
not positive they were in when the rebel 
spoke. He spoke about the death of Col- 
lins, and advised the crowd to go home. 
He said he had received a dispatch stating 
that he would probably be arrested that 
night; and I heard from another source 
that such a dispatch had been carried to 
him. The crowd then dispersed. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I staid during the whole of the speech. 
I have forgotten the name of the rebel from 
Georgia, but it seems to me they called him 
Captain Manderville. He did not say that 
he had taken the oath of allegiance to the 
United States Government, or that he had 
been in the Quartermaster's Department 
for several months. When Mr. Humphreys 
spoke of the death of this man and the dis- 
patch that he had received, and that it was 
likely that he would be arrested, he spoke 
quite solemnly. 

The Judge Advocate here announced to 
the Commission that he had closed the 
case on the part of the Government. 

The Commission then adjovirned, to meet 
on Thursday, November 17, 1864, at 9 
o'clock, A. M. 



Court Koom, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
November 17, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 



All the members present, except Colonel 
Wass. Also, the Judge Advocate, the ac- 
cused (except W. A. Bowles), and their 
counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

William G. Moss, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows : 

I reside in Green county, Indiana, and 
am a farmer. I was elected Sheriff of the 
county in 1856, and served until 1860, when 
I was elected as Representative, and served 
in two 'sessions of the Legislature. I wa.s 
re-elected Sheriff last October. I am ac- 
quainted with Mr. Humphreys; have been 
a neighbor of his for about twenty-two 
years, and was in partnership with him in 
the mercantile business for nearly a year. 
I joined an order called the American 
Knights, in September, 1863. I took the 
first degree in our store, in Green county. 
This was before I entered into partnership 
with Mr. Humphreys. I believe he was at 
a meeting of the order in Indianapolis on 
the 16th or 17th of February, 1864. 1 did 
not know of the meeting at the time I 
came here to visit Indianapolis on business 
When here I met Mr. Heffren and Mr. 
Ma.lott, from Sullivan. They insisted on 
my going to the meeting. I was present 
when an election, or an appointment of 
officers, took place; major generals and dep- 
uty commanders, probably, but I am not 
certain, and other officers, were appointed. 
Mr. Milligan, Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Walker, 
and probably Mr. Bowles, were elected or 
appointed Major Generals. I took back to 
my own county the news of this meeting, 
and in a few days after the meeting I saw 
Mr. Humphreys, and I informed him of 
what had taken place — that he was ap- 
pointed a Major General. 

Q. What did he say about it ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

Q. Were you autliorized to take the news 
of that election to Mr. Humphreys? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate. 

The counsel for the accused requested 
the Judge Advocate to state his grounds of 
objection. 

The rule of law is clear, that while in the 
prosecution of cases of conspiracy, the Gov- 
ernment may prove the admissions of the 
accused as against him, he can not, in his 
own defense, prove counter statements 
which were made at any dift'erent time 
than the specific time when the admissions 
are proven. In illustration of what I mean, 
suppose I prove that in a certain conversa- 
tion Mr. Milligan made certain admis.sions 
to any party, they may call out that entire 
conversation, and any explanatory facts and 
statements he then made in liis own behalf. 
But while I may prove any distinct admis- 



158 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



sion as against him, they can not prove any 
distinct, separate statements in his favor. 
Such a rule of law as is contended for by 
the accused, would destroy the possibility 
of the conviction of any individual for crime. 
If an individual is indicted for murder, the 
act may be proven against him, and his ad- 
missions as against himself; but any counter 
statements after the deed, to the effect he 
did it in self-defense, or in defense of his 
property, can not be admitted in his favor. 
In conspiracy trials, the rule is: if a person 
is engaged in a common conspiracy, and 
addresses a meeting, or is at any of the 
meetings of the Council where the general 
purposes of the conspiracy were discussed, 
if the State proves against him any distinct 
statements or admissions, the defense may 
call out all the statements and surround- 
ings under which it was made, as a part of 
the res gestcc; but they can not go into any 
separate statement made at a different time 
and place. These distinct statements stand 
alone, and not as part of the res gestos. The 
accused can not exculpate himself from 
crime by his own assertions. 

The accused replied: 

The accused have come to the conclusion 
that they have no other resort to vindicate 
themselves from the inferences which the 
Judge Advocate seeks to raise against them, 
than to introduce testimony concerning 
their own relations to and declarations 
about the order. If we can not introduce 
our repudiation and rejection of the oflice 
which was attempted to be thrust upon us 
in our absence, and show that from the 
moment we knew of it until the dissolution 
of the order, we repudiated it, then we 
have no opportunity to vindicate ourselves 
from the charges sought to be proven against 
us. It has been shown by the prosecution 
that Humphreys was elected a Major Gen- 
eral at the February meeting of the order, 
which he did not attend, and of which he 
could have no knowledge at the time, nor 
until he was informed of it, and that is as 
far as the evidence shows his connection 
with it. Another fact has been proven, 
namely, that the military branch of the 
order was intended for the subversion of 
the Union, detaching certain States, either 
to form a North-western Confederacy, or be 
attached to the Southern Confederacy ; and 
from this fact will be argued the treasona- 
ble character of the military part of the 
order. Now, the accused is only connected 
with the military part of the order by the 
fact ot his election as a Major General, 
which transpired in his absence, and of 
which there is no proof he had any knowl- 
edge. Now, we present the counter fact, 
that when he was informed of that election, 
he rejected and repudiated the oflSce, and 
thereafter had nothing to do with that part 
of the order. That is what we propose to 
prove. The Judge Advocate objects to it, 



because it is not a part of the conversation 
he has seen proper to introduce. The Com- 
mission can not determine what conversa- 
tions he has introduced. It is impossible 
to determine when the conversation he 
has introduced transpired, and when he 
said certain things; as, for instance, they 
have proven, or assume to have proven, 
that he accepted a Brigadier Generalship, 
and agreed to command a certain portion 
of the forces in the order. There is no evi- 
dence of this fact. The whole history of 
Mr. Humphreys' connection with the order, 
from his initiation until the commence- 
ment of this trial, has been dragged before 
this Commission, without reference to time 
or place, or under what circumstances hia 
admissions wore made. To show his char- 
acter and real connection with the order, 
we shall offer, and claim the right to offer, 
until it is denied us, evidence covering the 
whole period from his election to a Major 
Generalship, to the commencement of this 
trial, to show that he was guilty of no trea- 
sonable project, declaration, act, or conspir- 
acy. That, on the contrary, he avowed 
himself ready to obey and support the laws 
and Constitution of his country, and even 
to death, and against every proposition in- 
imical to the laws and Constitution of his 
country. 

You see, gentlemen of this Commission, 
that unless this is permitted, we can not in- 
troduce any proof in fact, for written com- 
munications are not admissible. There is no 
evidence, but hearsay, that he accepted this 
Commission. There is no evidence that he 
is connected with any treasonable acts, or 
tending to show this fact. Now, we want to 
show his acts, his life, his confidential com- 
munications to his intimate friend, his 
partner. The law, I grant you, is not defi- 
nite on that point. I read from Roscoe's 
Criminal Evidence^ page 88: 

" The acts and declarations of a prisoner, 
given in evidence in his favor, ought to be 
connected both in point of subject-matter 
and of time, with the acts or declarations 
proved against him. See Phill. Ev., 500, 
8<A ed. In the two following cases, how- 
ever, great latitude was allowed on trials for 
high treason. When the overt act charged 
was, that the prisoner to compass the King's 
death, conspired with others to call a con- 
vention of the people, etc.; the prisoner's 
counsel was allowed to ask the witness 
whether, before the time of the convention, he had 
ever heard from the prisoner what his ob 
jects were, and whether he bad at all mixed 
himself in the business. Hardy's case, 24 
How. St. Tr., 1097. So in Home Tooke's case, 
I East. P. a, 61 ; 25 How. 8t Tr., 545, evi- 
dence having been given, on the part of the 
crown, of several publications containing 
republican doctrines and opinions, which 
had been distributed by the prisoner during 
the period assigned in the indictment, (for 



TREASON TRIALS AT ESrDIA]SrAPOLI&, 



lOd 



high treason,) for the existence of the con- 
spiracy, the prisoner offered to put in a 
book, written by him, expressive of his 
veneration for the King and the constitu- 
tion; this was objected to as being antece- 
dent to the period of the conspiracy, and 
not relating to the particular transaction. 
After argument, the book was admitted, on 
the ground that it had reference to the 
proof given in support of the charge, to re- 
but the idea, that a reform in Parliament 
was a pretense made by the prisoner, and 
that his real object was to overturn the 
Government." 

Now, if the Judge Advocate is correct in 
his conclusions, there can be introdviced 
against Mr. Humphreys the acts and dec- 
larations of others, and implicate him in 
their transactions, and make him liable for 
all that was done at that meeting, in his 
absence, unless he shows that he repudiated 
the whole thing. Roscoe, in another para- 
graph, says: 

"On the trial of an indictment for a con- 
spiracy to overthrow the government, evi- 
dence was given to show that the conspiracy 
was brought into overt act, at meetings, in 
the presence of the prisoner Walker. His 
counsel was allowed to ask, whether, at those 
times, he had heard Walker utter any word 
inconsistent with the duty of a good subject. 
He was also allowed to inquire into the 
general declarations of the prisoner at the 
meetings, and whether the witness had 
heard him say any thing that had a tend- 
ency to disturb the peace. Ibid., 23 How. St. 
Tr., 1131; 31 J<^., 43." 

Now, the act of the election is proved against 
Mr. Humphreys. We propose, on the point 
of time and fact, to connect his declarations 
on receiving the first news of his appoint- 
ment, to show that he repudiated it, and 
was in no way mixed up in the business. 
We, also, propose to show, that before the 
time of this illegitimate uprising, which was 
to have taken place in pursuance of this 
conspiracy, and immediately after his elec- 
tion to military office, he rejected and re- 
pudiated his election, and declared that he 
would have nothing more to do with the 
order, and would not be mixed up with this 
business by the action of others. The case 
quoted of Hardy, was a simple hearsay case. 
The prisoner's counsel was allowed to ask 
the witness whether, at any time before the 
convention, he had ever heard from the 
prisoner what his objects were, and whether 
he had at all mixed himself up in the busi- 
ness. So in Home Tooke's case, the prison- 
er's counsel was permitted to introduce a 
booJE, written before the time of the alleged 
offense, ti prove his fealty to the King, and 
that his design was not to overturn the 
-Toverni 1 3at. True, Lord Ellenborough 
doubts \±e soundness of this decision; but 
his is tnc opinion only of one judge, while 
*he other judges concurred against him. 



This decision stands in the light of as 
good authority as if it had not been ques- 
tioned. It can not overturn the decision 
of the whole Court. 

If, in the case of Home Tooke, a book 
written before the time of the conspiracy, 
could be introduced to show the loyalty of 
the prisoner to his King, with how much 
stronger reason may we press our claim to be 
permitted to introduce evidence about the 
time of the election of Mr. Humphreys as 
Major General, to show that he then re- 
pudiated the whole scheme. The point 
seems to me to be too clear for argument, 
that justice requires that the accused be 
allowed to introduce counter-statements, 
occurring during the period of his alleged 
connection with the order, to rebut the 
hearsay evidence introduced against him 
by the Government. This necessity in- 
volves the introduction of conversations 
and acts, running through the whole period 
from September, 1863, to his arrest in 1864. 
This is necessary to show, in the light of all 
his declarations and acts, what his whole 
conduct has been. It is due to every man's 
individual acts, that they should be con- 
strued by all his surrounding acts which 
have reference to the same transactions. 
This is allowed to the defense. The general 
character of the accused for loyalty and de- 
votion to his country is needed as a rebutter 
to the charge of conspiracy or treason, when 
the evidence on which that depends is 
doubtful. This rule we apply to the pres- 
ent case. It is evident that Mr. Humphreys 
had no connection with the order at the 
time this conspiracy was planned. We 
show that as soon as he was elected, he re- 
pudiated the office of Major General ; and 
that in every step of his life since he joined 
the order, he has acted the part of a good 
citizen. We shall show that, in the case of 
the men pursuing the soldiers near Cale- 
donia, he overtook them and called them 
back from their pursuit, and reminded them 
of their duties as good citizens. If, in some 
degree, he identified himself with the mob, 
and went half-way with them, or assumed 
to be of them, to get influence over them, it 
can not be an evidence of his guilt, but of that 
tact which is necessary to the performance 
of his duties as a citizen. We will go through 
his whole life, if need be, and show that he 
had been devoted to the laws, constitution, 
and peace of his country, and opposed to 
every thing which would tend to the sub- 
version of the Government. 

The charge in this case is that of con- 
spii'acy, and it extends as far back as the 
meeting at Terre Haute, in July or August, 
1863, up to the time when these conspira- 
tors were arrested. I believe there is evi- 
dence tending to fix guilt on these conspir- 
ators, even after their arrest. It is charged 
that from July or August, 1863, until Sep- 
tember or October, 1864, this conspiracy was 



160 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



maturing, and its members ripening trea- 
sonable schemes to overturn the Govern- 
ment. To prove these charges, the Judge 
Advocate introduces evidence to show what 
each one has done or intended to do, dur- 
ing this time, in the j^rosecution of this 
crime. The evidence consists of the dec- 
larations and acts of the several conspira- 
tors, what they have said and done, and 
that their design and purpose was to over- 
turn the Government. All this forms a 
part of the res gestcc of the transaction, of 
the crime with which they are charged. In 
the case of any particular act of crime, we 
prove the act and the circumstances con- 
nected with it as the res gesta, as confined 
to that particular time. But this is a con- 
tinuous act, universal, and involving, in its 
meshes for ruin, all these men. If this 
order is, per se, a conspiracy, these acts are 
part of this constant act, and if they are 
arraigned before this Commission, their ad- 
missions, injustice, should be introduced in 
their own defense. I am willing that every 
fiber shall be woven, in the web of testi- 
mony, of the acts of each one as against 
them all, if the connection be established 
between these men, and I am willing that 
the men who are connected thus, shall go 
with that man who is connected with the 
treasonable eftbrt. But let us not attempt to 
entangle, in this terrible drag-net, a man 
who is not guilty, who never concurred in 
their treason, but repudiated the act which 
would Imve brought him to ruin. Let him 
have the benefit of his acts from the first 
until now. It is not proven that he had 
any other connection with the order, than 
that he was elected Major General. There 
is no evidence that he had attached himself 
to the order until then, and that is only an 
inference. If he was not a member, it is 
due to him that he should explain that 
matter bj' his own declarations, made at 
the time he learned that he was elected. 
That if he knew nothing of the military 
part of the order, it is proper that he should 
prove his repudiation of it at that time. 

What would Mr. Bingham have thought, 
who, having been told that there was noth- 
ing in the order incompatible with the du- 
ties of a good citizen, had he been elected a 
Major General and assigned to the com- 
mand oi' a district of the State? And sup- 
pose, when they elected Humphreys, they 
had pointed out his duties and given him 
the ulterior purposes of the organization, 
namely, to establish a North-western Con- 
federacy, or that failing, to attach them- 
selves to the treasonable Confederacy of 
the South? Suppose all that had been ex- 
plained to him, would he have no right to 
go forward and show why he eschewed the 
office, and any relations to such an organi- 
zation as this? If he has no such right, he 
has no defense at all. The worst enemy he 
has in the world may bind him hand and 



foot, and deliver him over for trial, to be 
doomed to a, dishonorable death. I can 
not think the laws justify such a consti'uc- 
tion, or that this Commission wiU deter- 
mine this point in such a manner, and I 
submit the point for their decision. 

The Judge Advocate, in reply, said: 

I desire to direct the attention of the 
Court to a few points, not because I deem 
the question at issue of so much importance 
to the Government, but because it may 
settle the rule of examination to be pursued 
in this case. At the same time, I believe if 
it should be decided against the Govern- 
ment, it would work great injustice. The 
gentleman's own law is all I ask to decide 
the case against him. The authority from 
which he quoted, says: 

" As in trials for conspiracies, whatever 
the prisoner may have done or said at any 
meeting alleged to be held in pursuance of 
the conspiracy, is admissible in evidence on 
the part of the prosecution against him; 
so, on the other hand, any other part of 
his conduct, at the same meetings, will be 
allowed to be proven on his behalf; for the 
intention and design of a party at a partic- 
ular time, are best explained by a complete 
view of every part of his conduct at that 
time, and not merely from the proof of a 
single and insulated act or declaration." 
Hoscoes Criminal Evidence, page 88. 

Had the counsel for the accused read a 
little further, he would have found the de- 
cision he quoted overruled. Roscoe adds: 
"The soundness of this decision has been 
doubted by Lord Ellenborough, who said, if 
the point should ever occur before him, it 
would become his duty seriously to consider 
whether such evidence should be admitted. 
Lamheris case, 2 Ccmp., 409. In the follow- 
ing case, a stricter limit was placed to the 
investigation of the acts and declarations 
of a prisoner. On the trial of Lord George 
Gordon, a witness was asked by his counsel 
on cross-examination, as to a statement 
made by the prisoner on the night before the 
meeting in St. George's Fields, and with re- 
spect to which such evidence had been 
produced. The question was overruled, 
and Lord Mansfield said, that as the coun- 
sel for the crown had given evidence of 
what the prisoner said at the meeting on 
the 29th of May, the counsel for the pris- 
oner might show the whole connection of 
what the prisoner said, besides, at that meet- 
ing, but that they could not go into evi- 
dence of what he said on an antecedent day. 
21 Hoxo. St. Tr., 542." 

This decision was reaffirmed in a subse- 
quent case to that of Home Tboke, overrul- 
ing the decision in that case, as will be seen 
from the closing sentence of the paragi-aph 
just quoted : 

" So in Hansons case, on the charge of 
promoting a riot, the prisoner's counsel was 
not allowed to prove what he said privately 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIAXAPOLIS. 



161 



to a friend, previously to his going to the 
place of riot, respecting his motives in going 
thither. 31 How. St. Tr., 1281." _ _ 

That is the most recent decision. But, 
the rule, even as given by the gentleman, 
does not go to the extent he claims. On 
the other hand. I claim for the Government 
that if the alleged conspiracy had been in- 
augurated on the first day of August, I 
could, on the part of the Government, go 
back a few days or months, and introduce 
acts of the accused to show the intentions 
and purposes of the act, before the 1st of 
August. At the same time, the accused 
can go back, and show that the tenor of 
his life had been against his entering upon 
any such project; but they can not go back 
and prove distinct counter statements on 
the part of the defendant. If we examine 
the argument of the gentleman, its fallacy, 
I think, will be apparent. He asks, shall 
this defendant be bound by what transpired 
in his absence? He says that he should 
not. I say that he shall; and thus saith 
the law. When any man takes upon him- 
self the obligations of the Order of Ameri- 
can Knights, or Sons of Liberty, he takes 
upon himself the responsibility for the acts 
of that body, ivhether he be absent or 
present. 

From the time a man takes the oaths of 
this conspiracy, he takes upon hiniself re- 
sponsibility for the acts of the entire or- 
ganization, he agrees to stand by the illegal 
and treasonable acts of every member of 
the organization. So says the law. I pro- 
pose to connect these men not only with 
what was done in their presence, but in 
their absence, and hold them accountable. 
The law says that when there is a con- 
spiracy formed, and men league themselves 
together, that they may have greater power 
to accomplish their evil purposes, they 
shall be held to a greater responsibility, 
and all those who perform any part, how- 
ever minute, or however remote from the 
scene of action, but who are actually 
leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be 
considered as aiders and abettors in the same. 

The accused argue that this association 
is not per se a conspiracy, and that the 
Judge Advocate has assumed this point; 
that as yet it is an open question before 
the Court, and until it is settled, the argu- 
ment of the Judge Advocate is not pertin- 
ent, and that it can not be settled until 
the close of the case. All the evidence in- 
troduced would never have been permit- 
ted by the accused to come in, but on the 
ground that the Government had proven 
the organization a conspiracy per se. If not 
a conspiracy per se, then the declarations of 
otlier members as co-conspirators could not 
bs introduced against any one of the ac- 
cc.46ed. Almost every witness we have put 
or the stand on the part of the Govern- 
E.ent could have had his mouth closed by 
11 



the able counsel for the accused, on any 
other foundation than that the order was 
a conspiracy ^JtT 5(^. They are not the able 
counsel that 1 take them to be if they per- 
mit their clients to be convicted on defec- 
tive and irrelevant testimony. We have 
examined the witnesses on the hypothesis 
that it was a conspiracy in itself Except 
on that hypothesis, we could not have 
proven a single act or statement of Dodd, 
or Walker, or Wright, or any member of 
the order, except the accused. The ques- 
tion has been put to nearly every witness, 
"Is this man a member of the order ?" If 
so, there was no objection to the admission 
of any one of his statements or acts. 

Is it a conspiracy within the meaning of 
the law, an agreement to do a legal thing 
in an illegal manner, or to do an illegal 
thing in a legal inanner? Is this not a con- 
spiracy where men bind themselves with 
oaths — the penalty for the violation of these 
oaths being death — oaths violative of all 
laws, and peace and order — bind themselves 
to execute without hesitation the com- 
mands of their officers in the order, and 
agree that the National Government is only 
a compact to be dissolved at pleasure? Is 
that order a conspiracy the members of 
Which pledge themselves to form a North- 
western Confederacy, and failing in that to 
attach themselves to the Southern Confed- 
eracy ; where they plot the I'clease of the 
enemies of the Government, the seizure of 
arsenals, the capture of State officers, the 
subversion of State Governments, and the 
destruction of the lives and property of 
the citizens of the States where those men 
reside? Is not all this a combination 
and agreement to do an illegal act? The 
accused argue that they do not defer d the 
acts referred to, but that the civil ])art of 
the order was purely political; and that the 
military purposes of the order were con- 
fined to the military part of it, and that 
those who belonged to that part of the or- 
ganization are alone ' responsible for it. 
They can not separate the parts of the 
order, each belonged to the other, and all 
those in the civil portion were bound 
by their oaths to obey the military chiefs. 
It was only on the hypothesis that the or- 
der was illegal as a means and an end, that 
we could introduce proof of the acts and 
admissions of its members. Benet, page 
291, says: 

"The acts and declarations of other con- 
spirators, in the absence of the prisoner, 
are admissible against him; and the pris- 
oner may be affected by writings from 
other jiersons which come into his custody 
before his apprehension. In these cases 
the evidence is of a direct nature, applying 
to the acts in furtherance of a conspiracy, 
and not circumstantial, as proving only 
collateral circumstances from which these 
acts are to be inferred." 



162 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Let me explain this rule of law, which 
works no injustice to the accused. On the 
part of the Government, I may show that 
the order is a conspiracy, and that the 
accused is a member of it; and then prove 
the acts of the body or of any member 
of it, in pursuance of the general purposes 
of the order. The accused can not go 
into isolated facts to show that he is not 
connected with its purposes. For instance, 
if T prove that he was consulted at a cer- 
tain meeting of the order about breaking 
up the Government, and made attempts to 
arm the members, they can not rebut it 
by showing that at other meetings of the 
order, or at other times and places, he said 
things in favor of the Government. They 
attempt to disprove a bad act by proving a 
good one. If I indict a man for horse- 
stealing, he can not rebut that crime by 
proving that he has restored to their owners 
horses stolen by others. The transactions 
of this order are made up of separate acts, 
vrhich I prove as parts of a whole. The 
accused can rebut or explain what I have 
undertaken to prove took place at these 
meetings. They say that Humphreys re- 
pudiated this office. They must prove this 
by showing that he repudiated it to the 
source from vhich it came. What he said 
to this or that man, or to a hundred men, 
about repudiating that office, is not suffi- 
cient proof The appointment came from 
Ihe Grand Council, and the official notifica- 
tion would be given by the Grand Com- 
mander or Grand Secretary. If he wrote 
to them repudiating the office, the produc- 
tion of the letter would prove that fact. 
Or, if the letter could not be produced, if 
it was lost, he could prove the fact, and 
prove by the parties who received it what 
the contents of the letter were. But he 
can not prove his repudiation of the office 
by what he has said to other and outside 
parties. It has been proved that Hum- 
phreys was willing to accept a Brigadier 
Generalship and stay in the rear. They 
have the right to prove that his command 
was not of that character. That fact does 
not show that he was a Brigadier General ; 
but shows that he was so connected with tlie 
order, that he had its confidence, and espe- 
cially does it connect him with the military 
part of the order. If they prove that no 
such conversation took place, and no such 
thing was stated, or that there was no com- 
munication on that point, they destroy the 
evidence adduced on this point. The ques- 
tion is whether the order undertook to 
make him a Brigadier General. 

We also prove that he was with a body 
of men at a certain time, who were en- 
gaged in an illegal act. Let the accused 
show why he was there. If they prove 
that he was at the meeting for legal pur- 
poses, they have the benefit of it. We 
prove that he was at a meeting addressed 



by an avowed rebel. Let them prove that 
he was not a rebel, and that he made no 
such speech as is attributed to him. His 
acts at these times and places show the 
character of the transaction. But he can 
not disprove bad acts and speeches, by prov- 
ing good ones at other times and places. 

The law of conspiracy is clear, that its 
members are bound by the acts of co-con- 
spirators. Whatever Walker or Dodd did 
at Chicago, or here, in pursuance of the 
purposes of the order, binds Humphreys, 
just as though they were proven as acts of 
Humphreys. Because he is an arm, and 
Dodd the head in the conspiracy, it is no 
defense for him to say he is not the head. 

The accused have attempted to make a 
distinction between the Administration and 
the Government. The-y can not do this. 
The Administration is the Government de 
facto. It exists in three branches — the ex- 
ecutive, legislative and the judicial depart- 
ments. They are co-ordinate parts of a 
whole, and he who arrays himself against 
any one of these departments contrary to 
law, commits treason. And when any body 
of men so far forget themselves as to do 
this, they must be taught that every part 
of this Government must be respected, and 
can only be set aside by legal means. If 
men plot treason, and array themselves 
with the enemies of the Government, when 
it is struggling for its very existence, they 
must feel the power of that Government, 
and meet the fate that conspirators and 
traitors so richly deserve. 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. 

On reopening the court room, the Judge 
Advocate announced to the accused that 
the objection was sustained. 

Mr. Humphreys, on receiving information 
of his appointment, rejected it. 

I remember the time of the excitement 
at Caledonia, in Sullivan county. I over- 
took Mr. Humphreys on the road, as he was 
going there; he said that his purpose in 
going there was to put down the disturb- 
ance and quell the riot, and that he had 
sent on a couple of men to have the thing 
stopped; Mr. Snow was the name of one of 
these men, the name of the other I have 
forgotten. The men who had arms were 
stopped by Mr. Humphreys at Caledonia, 
Mr. Humphreys made a speech of consid- 
erable length, urging them to return home, 
and saying he did not think the soldiers 
intended to do any thing wrong — that he 
could not think for a moment that the 
Government had sent soldiers to trespass 
upon the rights of citizens. They had taken 
a hoise or two from Mr. Wagner, and an- 
other from the widow McBride, and a bridle 
and saddle from Mr. Pigg; they took his 
son out through the pasture to make him 
hunt horses. The report was, that Mr. Pigg 
had been shot at, and from the appearance 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS, 



163 



of his hat, I should judge he had been. 
Mr. Humphreys, in his speech, advised the 
people to go home and behave themselves; 
he knew that the Government would not 
send soldiers to harass them; he said the 
soldiers had made ample satisfaction, and 
restored the horses to Mr. Wagner; this 
was four and a half miles from Sullivan. 
The soldiers had gone toward Sullivan, and 
the disposition of the crowd was to go after 
the soldiers; but Mr. Humphreys said that 
satisfaction had been made as regarded the 
horses, and it was best to be peaceable and 
go home. He said if they went to Sullivan 
they would get to drinking, and get in a 
row with the soldiers. Mr. Humphreys 
said that Mr. Cowgill was a Government 
officer, and must be heard, and he made a 
speech, and told them to go home. Mr. 
Cowgill said he could indorse Mr. Humph- 
reys' speech. I don't remember that poli- 
tics were mentioned in Mr. Humphreys' 
speech, but the whole tendency of it was 
for the purpose of quieting the crowd. I 
have been personally acquainted with Mr. 
Freeman, the enrolling officer, for four or 
five years before his death; we lived in 
the same township. He lived in Sulli- 
van county, Cass township, and Mr. 
Humphreys lived in Green county ; I think 
they lived about ten or eleven miles from 
each other. 

Q. State whether, at the time of the as- 
sassination of Mr. Freeman, and afterward, 
Mr. Humphreys did not denounce the kill- 
ing of Mr. Freeman, as a cowardly and 
base act ? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

I have known Mr. Humphreys very inti- 
mately; we boarded and roomed together. 
I do not know that Mr. Humphreys ever 
drilled any body of men; I do not think he 
knows any thing about military tactics. 

Q. Are you acquainted with the general 
character of Mr. Humphreys as a law-abid- 
ing, peaceable man, devoted to the main- 
tenance of the laws and Constitution, and 
the union of his country ? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

Q. Are you acquainted with the general 
character of Mr. Humphreys? 

A. His general character, I think, is 
good. 

Q. Are you acquainted with his general 
character as a peaceable, law-abiding man, 
devoted to the conservation of the laws, the 
Constitution, and the union of the coun- 
try? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, for the reason that it is a leading one, 
and it covers the very points which this 
Commission is to decide, whether or not the 
accused is a law-abiding, peaceful citizen, 
devoted to the laws of his country. He 
can introduce testimony as to his general 
moral character. In some cases, before mil- 
itary courts, the accused can prove his par- 



ticular traits of character, as in a trial on 
a charge of cowardice, he can prove partic- 
ular acts of personal bravery to rebut the 
charge. It is not permitted to prove by a 
witness what the Commission is sitting here 
to determine. 

The accused replied : 

The Judge Advocate admits that it is com- 
petent for us to prove general moral charac- 
ter. That if a witness questions the truth 
and veracity of the accused, we could prove 
his general character for truth and veracity. 
If he were charged with a crime involving 
a lack of chastity, it would be competent to 
introduce proof of his general character for 
chastity. If he were arraigned on a charge 
involving violence, brutal assault, or mur- 
der, it would be competent to introduce 
proof that his general character was that of 
a peaceable man, indisposed to quarrels or 
to participate in them. The charge against 
the accused is one involving his disposition 
to obey the laws of his country, and it is on 
that question that he seeks to introduce 
proof He has the right to show his gene- 
ral character for obedience to the laws and 
the Constitution, and to have the benefit of 
that evidence on this trial. 

Questions as to character are always lead- 
ing ones. The witness is asked: "Do you 
know what his general moral character is ?" 
If so, he states whether it is good or bad. 
General character and general reputation 
I consider synonymous. We, in like man- 
ner, put the question as to his general char- 
acter as to obedience to the Constitution 
and laws of his country. The law denies us 
the privilege of putting other than a leading 
question. If the witness states that he 
knows what that character is, we ask him is 
it good or bad? Surely we ought not to be 
denied the right to put that question. 
That is conceded in principle by DeHart in 
his work on Military Law. I quote from 
page 344 : 

"The prisoner is allowed to call witnesses to 
prove his character, but then it must be un- 
derstood that character unconnected with 
the charge can not be admitted as evidence to 
influence the finding of the Court. General 
character thus presented for the notice of 
the Court, may be of advantage by modify- 
ing the punishment to be decreed by the 
Court, or presenting the case to the review- 
ing authority as one in which mercy may be 
exercised, and thus procure pardon for the 
offender, of mitigation of the sentence." 

The proof must be connected with the 
charge. One reason why general military 
character is allowed to be introduced is be- 
cause it embraces all the specific details 
which make up that character. That is ex- 
actly in point to the present case. 

I read still further: 

"Courts-martial will always permit the 
prisoner to present evidence of character, 
and do not require that it should be9,r 



164 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS, 



analogy, and have reference to the charge 
in issue, and such testimony, when the 
evidence against liim is doubtful, may 
be sufficient to warrant an acquittal. It 
must be apparent, that wherever intention 
is a principal ingredient in the offense 
charged, depending too upon presumptive 
proof, evidence as to character which ap- 
plies directly to the nature of the accusa- 
tion may be exceedingly important." 

In this case intention is an important in- 
gredient, showing how and why as a loyal 
man he connected himself with the order. 
If he is a loyal man, always obedient to his 
Government, never in any manner inter- 
fering with its peace, nor attempting to 
break up the Union, this is testimony in his 
favor, which should be admitted in his favor 
to rebut the doubtful evidence against hina. 

The Judge Advocate replied: 

It will save the time of the Court to settle 
these preliminary questions now. I admit 
most certainly, as the gentleman knows, 
that you can inquire as to the general char- 
acter of a person accused of certain classes 
of offenses. In this case the character of 
the accused is made up of his acts, they 
have a right to prove that his acts alleged 
to be disloyal were not so, but they can not 
settle the question of character by putting 
the leading and affirmative question whether 
he is devoted to the Constitution, laws and 
Union of his country. They go too far 
when they attempt that. When they 
attempt to prove his devotion to the laws 
and Constitution, they go beyond the bounds 
allowed as to general character. If they wish 
to present it as a matter to secure mitiga- 
tion of the sentence, I may allow its intro- 
duction. 

I will, however, waive the objection for 
the present, and allow the question to be 
put to the witness. 

I do know the general character of Mr. 
Humphreys as a peaceable, law-abiding 
man, devoted to the conservation of the 
laws and Constitution, and the Union of his 
country ; and that general character is 
good. 

Q. State whether or not the general char- 
acter of Mr. Humphreys, during the period 
of time since the war broke out, has not 
been that of a peacemaker, and in favor of 
the enforcement of the laws. 

Question objected to. 

The accused stated that if the objection 
was insisted on he should be obliged to go 
into the detail of the times, and show by 
what sort of population INIr. Humphreys had 
been surrounded. He wished to prove his 
acts right along through this period re 
ferred to, by men who were always politic- 
ally opiwsed to him. 

The Judge Advocate replied: 

Then it must be proved by acts and not 
by opinions — '"What have been his acts as 
a general peacemaker, and what has been 



liis uniform conduct in regard to keeping 
the country quiet." 

The question was withdrawn. 

Question. AVhat have been his acts as a 
peacemaker from the inauguration of the 
presentrebellion to thetimehe was arrested? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

Q. What have been his acts from the 
commencement of the organization of the 
order at Terre Haute, until his arrest? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate oil the ground that the question must 
be confined to specific acts. 

The question was withdrawn. 

Q. Do you remember to have been at any 
meeting where Mr. Humphreys addressed 
the people, besides the one you have 
spoken of? 

A. I attended some two or three a year 
ago. One was at Linton; and he made two 
or three speeches, at which I was jaresent, 
from the start of the organization until the 
time of his arrest. He always advised 
obedience to the Government and the 
laws, or words to that effect, and every 
thing that had not the semblance of law 
about it, he would not advise obedience to, 
no matter what it was. 

Q. Do you know any thing about his sen- 
timents as to the action of his friends at 
the time of his arrest? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

A. Before Mr. Humphreys was arrested, it 
was frequently talked about by us. 

Q, When he received this rejaort, what 
course of conduct did he advise his friends 
to take ? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

Q. State what you know, if any thing, 
about Mr. Humphreys having incurred the 
displeasure of his party friends, because he 
insisted on obedience to the laws and the 
draft? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

Q. State what you know, if any thing, 
abotit Mr. Humphreys having repudiated 
Dodd and his schemes ? 

The Judge Advocate objected to the 
qtiestion because it was not confined to a 
particular time. 

Q, State what you know of Mr. Himi- 
phreys' repudiation of Dodd and his schemes 
during last summer? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

Q. State what you know on that point 
during his connection with the order? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

Q. State whether, from the 16th of last 
February up to the time of his arrest, Mr. 
Humphreys did not repudiate any public 
and private scheme of Mr. Dodd? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate. 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. On being reopened, the Judge 
Advocate amiounced to the accused that 
the objection was sustained. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



1G5 



After I returned home from Indianapolis, 
I went to Mr. Humphreys and talked with 
him about the order. He then went to 
the secretary of the temple, got the papers 
and destroyed them. He said he had not 
understood before that it was a military 
organization ; and as soon as he learned 
what were the purposes of the military or- 
ganization, he said he would have nothing 
more to do with it. That was shortly after 
his appointment as Major General. Mr. 
Gray, who had the papers, was the secre- 
tary of the township temple. I received 
my first degree at our township temple; 
the second degree I took in this city, in 
February, after which I returned home and 
informed Mr. Humphreys of his appoint- 
ment as Major General. I never met with 
any temple after that, nor to my knowl- 
edge has Mr. Humphreys. I believe I saw 
Mr. Humphreys in about ten days after I 
returned home from this city; and the 
papers must have been destroyed by him in 
March; they were destroyed in our store; 
I saw him tear them up. I do not know 
what papers they were, for I did not read 
them; Mr. Humphreys, Gray and myself, 
were at that time partners. Hi reference 
to that meeting of armed citizens, Mr. 
Humphreys said they had sent for him ; he 
went, and advised them to go home and be 
peaceable; that the soldiers did not mean 
to harm them. I have heard that the horse 
that was taken by the soldiers, was taken 
to carry a sick soldier a few miles, and that 
it was so stated, and would be returned. I 
believe the horses that were taken, were all 
returned. Mr. Humphreys might have been 
armed, as he generally carried a revolver. 
I did not hear any threats made against 
Mr. Cowgill at that meeting; the people list- 
ened to Mr. Cowgill while he was speaking, 
and heard all he had to say. The crowd 
said they came there to get their property 
from the soldiers. I did not hear any 
threats made against the soldiers or the 
Government; nor did I hear Mr. Lincoln's 
name mentioned. Nor did 1 hear Mr. 
Humphreys advise the people to go home, 
but not to sleep too soundly, though I was 
there all the time. I know Mr. Hum- 
phreys said that Mr. Cowgill had been ap- 
pointed by the Government, and that he 
must be heard; and I think he was listened 
to as attentively as Mr. Humphreys was. I 
have heard Mr. Humphreys during the 
summer say, that he did not indorse Mr. 
Lincoln's policy respecting the war, and 
that he thought the policy of arming the 
negroes was bad; that the way to remedy it 
was to beat him at the next election. I 
have heard him say it was the duty of the 
people to obey the laws. I never heard 
any thing about arming members of the 
order, till I heard of Dodd's having arms 
here; and I never knew any thing of the 
military organization till the appointment 



of the Major Generals. I undei'stood at the 
February meeting, that the State was di- 
vided into three or four districts, and a 
Major General was appointed for each dis- 
trict, and their commands, I supposed, were 
to consist of the members of the Order of 
American Knights ; 1 knew nothing of the 
change of the name of the order to the 
Sons of Liberty. 1 do not know positively 
whether Mr. Humphreys was at home on 
the 14th of June; the books do not show 
any handwriting made by him on that day, 
though he is in the habit of making en- 
tries. I know he was at home on the 13th. 
I never saw any members of the organiza- 
tion drill with or without arms. No assess- 
ment on our lodge was made, that I know 
of, for the purchase of arms, or for any 
other purpose. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

It was stated at the February meeting of 
the order, held in this city, that the object 
of the order was the more perfect organi- 
zation of the Democratic party, the estab- 
lishment of a newspaper, and the distribu- 
tion of campaign documents, etc.; I am 
not aware that it had any other than a 
political object, except the appointment 
of these officers ; and I did not know the 
purpose for which those appointments were 
made. I heard Mr. Humphreys say at 
Linton, that we ought to obey the laws as 
long as they were laws, no matter how 
oppressive they might be, and that good 
citizens would do so; that we must bear 
with them until we had a change in the 
Administration. The last entry but one 
made in our books on the 1 3th of June, 
for articles sold, is in the handwriting of 
Mr. Humphreys. It is sixteen miles from 
our place of business to Sullivan, the near- 
est point at which Mr. Humphreys could 
have taken the cars for this city; and had 
he left by the first train, he would not 
probably have been here till 7 o'clock on 
the evening of the 14th of June. 

The Commission then adjourned, to 
meet on Friday, November 18, 1864, at 9 
o'clock, A. M. 



,} 



Court Room, Indi.\napolis, Indiana, 

November 18, 18G4, 9 o'clock, A. M. 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused (except W. A. 
Bowies), and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved, 

D. 0. Dailey, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 

I reside in Huntington, Indiana, and am 
a lawyer. I have been intimately ac- 
quainted with Mr. Milligan eight years; 
and during the greater part of that time 
have practiced at the same bar; politically, 
I am not a sympathizer with Mr. Milligan. 



166 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Q. You may state what is Mr. Milligan's 
peculiar characteristic with regard to the 
concealment of his sentiments, or the ex- 
pression of them openly and publicly, with- 
out concealment. 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate as immaterial and irrelevant. 

The Court was cleared for deliberation. 
On being reopened, the Judge Advocate 
announced to the accused that the objec- 
tion was sustained. 

I am acquainted with Mr. Milligan's char- 
acter in the neighborhood in which he lives, 
and it is good. His general character as a 
peaceable, law-abiding citizen, is good, as 
far as I understand it. During the last year 
he has not taken an active jaart in politics, 
and during the campaign he took no part 
at all. Mr. Milligan, as a citizen, has the 
reputation of being a straight-forward, law- 
abiding man; as a lawyer, I think him very 
able; as a politician, I do not think he 
amounts to any thing at all, for this reason, 
that he takes special occasion to publish 
the most ultra and obnoxious sentiments ; 
and this he has always done, as far as my 
knowledge extends. Mr. Milligan, I know, 
was at home on the 22d of February; he 
was there when T v/ent away; I returned 
on the night of the 23d, and went to 
Court next morning, and Mr. Milligan was 
there. 

On the 20th of July, I know, by reference 
to my papers, that Mr. Milligan and myself 
were engaged in Huntington, in the case 
of Ripley vs. Ripley, before the Mayor. 

RicHAKD A. CuRREN, a wituess for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows: 

My residence is in Huntington; I am a 
Presbyterian minister, belonging to that 
I^art of the Presbyterian body generally 
denominated old school; my ecclesiastical 
connection, presbyterially, is with the pre.s- 
bytery of Fort Wayne, and synodically with 
the presbytery of Northern Indiana. I am 
acquainted with Mr. Milligan; I have 
known him intimately for the past six 
years. When Mr. Milligan attends minis- 
terial services any-where, he generally at- 
tends mine. The general moral character 
of Mr. Milligan is good. I am acquainted 
with his general reputation as a peaceable, 
law-abiding citizen, devoted to the Consti- 
tution and the institutions of our country ; 
and that reputation is generally good. 

Q. Have you any means of knowing Mr. 
Milligan's private or particular views upon 
the subject of revolution in this State, in 
the North-west, or in the United States? 

A. I have on several occasions hkd con- 
versations with Mr. Milligan on that sub- 
ject. 

Q. You may state them. 

The Judge Advocate objected to the 
question, stating his objection as follows: 



It is perfectly apparent that* what Mr. 
Milligan might have said in outside conver- 
sations, is immaterial to this Court. It is 
immaterial and illegitimate. I do not pro- 
pose to argue that point. The Commission, 
I think, have already passed upon that 
question. 

The counsel for the accused replied: 
I propose to limit the time of this con- 
versation to that covered by the alleged 
conspiracy. We claim the right to show 
that the purpose Mr. Milligan had in view 
in going into the order, was to control and 
direct it so that it should do no mischief. 
If his declarations, which are a part of the 
res gestcc, are not admitted in evidence, we 
can not show his real purposes, which may 
have been laudable. His declarations as to 
his purposes, are accompanying facts, and 
are, we contend, competent in evidence. 
The counsel here cited De Hart, page 354. 
Then, again, in the case cited in Hanson, of 
The Queen vs. Lambert, growing out of the 
Chartist case, Lambert was allowed to in- 
troduce testimony to show that he had 
made speeches in favor of law and order. 

The same principle is admitted in the 
case of Rex vs. Whitehead, \lth English Com- 
mon Law Reports, page 316. Roscoe, in his 
work on Criminal Evidence, remarks in this 
case : " On the trial of an indictment for 
conspiracy to defraud, the written corre- 
spondence of the defendant with another 
of the conspirators, relating to the transac- 
tion in question, was allowed to be read, in 
order to show that the defendant was de- 
ceived by his correspondent, and was not a 
participant in the fraud." Per Best, J., "I 
think them admissible, for what the parties 
say at the time, is evidence to show how 
they acted;" page 89. The same author, on 
page 22, says: "Where the inquiry is into 
the nature and character of a certain trans- 
action, not only what was done, but also 
what was said by both parties, during the 
continuance of the transaction, is admissi- 
ble; for to exclude this, would be to ex- 
clude the most important and unexception- 
able evidence. In this case, it is not the 
relation of third persons unconnected with 
the fact, which is received, but the declara- 
tions of the parties to the facts themselves, 
or of others connected with them in the 
transactions, which are admitted for the 
purpose of illustrating its peculiar character 
and circumstances. Thus it has been held 
on a prosecution for high treason, that the 
cry of the mob who accompanied the pris- 
oner, may be received in evidence as part 
of the conversation." 

In a foot note, the author says: 
"Where the state of mind, sentiment or 
disposition of a person at a given period be- 
come pertinent topics of inquiry, his dec- 
larations and conversations, Tteing part of 
the res qestce, mav be resorted to. Barthol- 
emy vs. The People, 2 Hill, 248." 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



167 



These decisions apply to the present case. 
It has been claimed that this organization 
was both civil and military, each being dis- 
tinct. It is proper to show the declarations of 
the accused, in order to show to which branch 
of the organization he belonged. If he ex- 
pressed contempt for the office of Major 
General, and denounced the military organ- 
ization, it becomes an important part of the 
res gestce, to show that he had nothing to do 
with, nor any sympathy with, the ulterior 
purposes of this organization. It certainly 
will not be claimed that each one of the 
eighteen thousand men who have joined this 
organization is responsible for the acts of 
Dodd and company. 

Page 24, the same author says: 

" If it be material to inquire whether a 
certain person gave a particular order on a 
certain day what he has said.or written, may 
be evidence of the order (see Jenkins case, 1 
Lewin, 0- C, 114); or where it is material to 
inquire whether a certain fact, be it true or 
false, has come to the knowledge of a third 
person, what he has said or written, may as 
clearly show his knowledge, as what he has 
done." 

Russell on Crime, 2d vol., page 779, says on 
the same point : 

"As other acts and declarations of the 
piisoner, besides those charged in the in- 
dictment, may be given in evidence on the 
part of the prosecution, so he himself in his 
defense may, in some cases, prove other acts 
and declarations of his own, as evidence of 
his innocence. Thus on a charge of murder, 
expressions of good will and acts of kind- 
ness, on the part of the prisoner toward the 
deceased, are always considered important 
evidence, as showing what was his general 
disposition toward the deceased, from which 
the jury may be led to conclude that his in- 
tention could not have been what the charge 
imputes." Also the case of Rex vs. Lambert, 
the cases of Walker, Hardy, Home Tooke, and 
Whitehead, Russell, pp. 779, 780. 

In the case reported in 29^A Georgia Re- 
ports, page 430, Freeman vs. The State, on a 
charge of taking a slave from his master, 
the defendant was permitted to introduce 
his whole declarations while carrying oft' 
the negro, as giving character to the act itself 

As the transactions which, it is alleged, 
tLe prisoner was a party to, were each for 
the overthrow of the Government, it is 
proper to introduce the declarations of the 
prisoner as part of the res gestce, and as show- 
ing his intent. 

The Judge Advocate replied: 

In proving a case against the accused, we 
prove his acts ; and the only reason why 
his words are permitted to be proven in the 
case, is that they tend to prove what his acts 
have been. They are admissions of acts. You 
can prove admissions against himself, be- 
cause the law says a man is not going to 
make admissions against his own interest. 



That is the reason why his words, which are 
admissions, are permitted to be proved 
against him. But yov; can not prove his 
declarations which are in his own favor, be- 
cause it is maintained to be constantly giv- 
ing a favorable tinge to his own conduct. 
The only case, in which the declarations of 
the accused in his favor can be given, is 
when they constitute a part of the distinct 
act charged, and are a part of the res gestce. 
The words which a man utters while doing 
an act can be proved, because they are in 
reality a part of the acts. The Government 
proves that Humphreys was at a certain 
illegal meeting. He proves what he said in 
going, as to his purposes and intentions in 
going, and what he did, and I do not object, 
because it is part of the act itself The de- 
fense can not introduce any declarations ex- 
cept as they become a part of the res gestm. 
We prove particular acts, at certain times 
and places, months intervening between 
them. The accused can not step in and 
prove, that between these times, at other 
places, he made assertions of loyalty. He 
can not thus purge himself of crime. 

And further, I do distinctly assert, that 
these eighteen thousand members of the 
Order of American Knights, or Sons of Lib- 
erty, are all of them j^arties to this con- 
spiracy, and held responsible for what Dodd 
and others did. I do maintain that when 
they joined that order with these oaths, 
they took upon themselves the responsibil- 
ity for the acts of every men:iber who took 
the same oaths. They can prove character, 
and the extent of their knowledge of the 
Bad purpose of the order, only in mitigation 
of their sentence. When they joined an 
illegal body they became responsible for the 
acts of all. That is the rule of law; the 
onus is then upon them; and they can only 
meet the proof by showing a want of knowl- 
edge of the extreme criminal intents of the 
order, and that they took only the first or 
vestibule degree. That lack of criminal 
knowledge would go in mitigation of the 
sentence. 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberation on the objection of the Judge 
Advocate. 

On reopening the Court, the Judge Ad- 
vocate announced that the objection had 
been sustained and the question overruled. 

I have heard public declarations made 
by Mr. Milligan about the Order of the 
Sons of Liberty, in the presence of a large 
crowd, and about his being made a Major 
General in the organization. That declarsv 
tion was made on Jefterson street, in Hunt- 
ington, and there may have been fifteen or 
twenty persons present. 

Q. State what these declarations were. 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate. 

The Court was then cleared for delibera- 
tion. On being reopened, the Judge Advo- 



168 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



cate announced to the accused that the ob- 
jection was sustained. 

This was some considerable length of 
time before Mr. !Milligan's arrest, and was 
at the time I first heard of the office of 
]\rajor General being conferred upon him. 
It was before Dodd's arrest, and was about 
the time of the exposure of the order in 
the public prints, though I had not at that 
time seen them myself. 

I am acquainted with Dr. Zumro, and 
have for the past four years been quite inti- 
mately acquainted. lie lives in Rock Creek, 
and I preach within four and half miles of the 
place, and a portion of my congregation re- 
side in Dr. Zumro's visiting district. I am 
acquainted with his general reputation for 
truth and veracity in the neighborhood 
■where he lives. That general reputation is 
bad : and from tha t reputation I would not 
believe him under oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

His reputation is bad among the class of 
men that attend upon my ministry. I am 
a Democrat, but do not consider myself a 
Butternut. 

I have heard Mr. Samuel D. Hays fre- 
quently say that Dr. Zumro was not to be 
trustecl — that he would not place confidence 
in his word. Mr. Hays is a Democrat. 1 
have also heard Mr. Samuel Brubaker say, 
during the past four or five years, that Zum- 
ro was not a man of truth. I heard him 
say this during last summer. I have heard 
Dr. Zumro thus spoken of within a month. 
Mr. Brubaker also spoke of Dr. Zumro as 
being a traitor to the Democratic party — 
professing to vote the Democratic ticket, 
when he held exactly the opposite senti- 
ments. 

I have heard Mr. John Brubaker fre- 
quently speak of him in the same way. I 
have heard him so speak within the last 
two months, when I was at his house. Dr. 
Zumro had complained to me that the Dem- 
ocrats had not patronized him — that af- 
ter he had voted the Democratic ticket, 
his patronage had fallen off, and requested 
me to make use of my influence to get 
people to employ him. In the course of 
the conversation, Mr. Brubaker said that 
he had no confidence in the Doctor. Mr. 
Brubaker and his brother are Democrats. 
I have also heard James Bandwit repre- 
sent him as a decidedly deceptive man; 
Mr. Bandwit is a Democrat. I have heard 
Mr. Peter Bandwit speak of him in the 
same way. I have known Mr. Peter Band- 
wit for six years, but 1 do not know whether 
he is a Democrat or not. 

Soon after I became acquainted witli Dr. 
Zumro, I was cautioned jus to the amount 
of confidence I should place in him. 1 
heard his character, spoken of to great dis- 
advantage fully four years ago. At one 
time 1 felt interested in him ; I stayed at 



his house one night, and have called on 
him often, and he has called at our house, 
and we regarded him as a pleasant man. 
but he did his utmost to get me and others 
into this organization, and thus involve us 
in trouble. I have no particular animosity 
toward the Doctor on that ground. Since 
the sitting of this Commiss-ion, I have re- 
fused to hold any communication with him, 
as I do not consider it safe to talk with 
him. But I had the most kindly feeling 
toward him, up to the time 1 discovered 
his treachery toward me; still 1 have no ill 
feeling toward him. I could do him a 
kindness now as well as I ever did. It is 
not a fact that the church over which I 
preside is composed almost entirely of Dem- 
ocrats ; nor is it true that Union men 
have refused to attend my preaching on 
account of my .disloyal sentiments. I sup- 
pose that most of those who attend my 
preaching belong to the Democratic party, 
but others do attend. The Democrats 
would be but a small majority. I have not 
said to any person that the Republicans re- 
fused to attend my ministry. 

I never excluded one of my own daughters 
from my house for marrying a Union man, 
nor did I threaten to whip her for that 
offense. 1 never laid a hand on her. My 
daughter visits my house now when she is 
inclined, and my wife visits her. 

Q. Did you use any violence whatever to- 
ward her? 

A. None whatever. 

Q. Did you not call her an Abolitionist? 

A. I never did. 

Q. Have you not yourself, and have not 
members of your family, worn Butternut 
badges at public meetings ? 

A. No, sir ; neither myself nor family ; 
I do not approve of such things. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

The trouble about my daughter grew out 
of the fact that 1 did not wish her to marry 
at that time, on account of her ill health; 
she was at that time suftering from the 
efi'ects of a sun-stroke. After she had left 
my house I was so interested in her, that 
I went after her in company with Mr. Col- 
froth. 

Some of the strongest Republicans in 
the town of Huntington have attended my 
preaching, among others Mr. Davis, who 
said the reason he attended, was because I 
abused no persons, but preached the gospel 
I received a Christmas present of four of 
five hundred dollars; I was furnished with 
a list of the donors, and many of them 
were Republicans. Mr. Milligan's name 
was not on the list. The men whom I have 
mentioned as speaking of Dr. Zumro's 
character, are the most repi)ectable farmers 
in the place, and there are others 1 have not 
UK ntioned, who speak of him in the same 
way; that reputation has been the same 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



169 



for some years jjast. Those who have thus 
spoken against Dr. Zumro ai'e not, accord- 
ing to their own clecUirations, members of 
the Order of American Knights or Sons of 
Liberty. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
at 2 o'clock. 

AFTERXOON SESSION. 

Court Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
November 18, ISti-l, 2 o'clock, P. M.J 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present; also, the Judge 
Advocate, the accused (except W. A. Bowles), 
and their counsel. 

John G. Scotton, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows : 

I live in Huntington, and am a farmer: 
I am Justice of the Peace. I have lived in 
the neighborhood twenty-two years. I have 
known Dr. Zumro about seven years, and 
I am acqviainted with his general rep- 
utation for truth and veracity in the 
neighborhood in which he lives. That rep- 
utation is bad ; and from that general rep- 
utation I would not believe him under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I have heard Albert Draper, who I believe 
is a Republican, say that Dr. Zumro was not 
an honest man; I do not know that he said 
any thing against his truth and veracity. 
1 have heard Dr. Scott say, that he did not 
consider him a true man ; he said he was 
a bad man. I have heard Thomas Smith 
speak of him; his opinion was, that he was 
a mean man. I have heard Jacob Rausch 
say that he was a damned mean mari, and 
that he would not believe him under oath. 
Adam Smith spoke against his truth and 
veracity. 

Q. Do you belong to the Union or the 
Democratic party? 

Question objected to by the accused. 

The Court was then cleared for delibera- 
tion ; on being reopened, it was announced 
by the Judge Advocate that the objection 
was overruled. 

A. I voted the Democratic ticket. I do 
not belong to any secret organization. I 
do not know but that I joined a secret or- 
der called the "Mighty Host." I took the 
oath, but never acted with them. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Dr. Scott, Adam Smith, and Mi'. Draper, 
of whom I have spoken, are Republi- 
cans, For the last four years Dr. Zumro 
has been holding himself out as a Demo- 
crat, professing to act with the Demo- 
cratic party. It was during this time that 
these Democrats thus spoke of him. 

William Satler, a witness for the accused, 



was then introduced, and being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows : 

I reside in Markle, and am a house carpen- 
ter ; I have lived there some twelve or thir- 
teen years ; I have known Dr. Zumro ever 
since I have lived in the place. I know his 
general reputation for truth and veracity; 
that reputation is bad; and I would not be- 
lieve him under oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I am a Democrat; I belonged to a secret 
society called the Mighty Host I do not 
know tliat that society merged into the 
Sons of Libertj% though I saw it mentioned 
in the papers. Dr. Zumro and I have not 
been friends, but I have never to any per- 
son made threats against Dr. Zumro. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

The society called the "Mighty Host," 
existed about three years ago, and I was 
only present at one meeting, and had 
nothing to do with it afterward. 

George Bailey, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows: 

I reside in Union township. Wells county, 
Indiana, and am a house carpenter; I have 
known Dr. Zumro seven or eight years. I 
am acquainted with his reputation for 
truth and veracity; it is bad, and I would 
not believe him under oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I have always voted the Democratic ticket. 
I belonged to the Order of the Sons of 
Liberty, but only attended two meetings. 
I also belonged to the society called the 
Mighty Host; that was before the Sons of 
Liberty. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

I have heard conversations in regard to 
Dr. Zumro' s want of truth and verp.city, 
from both Republicans and Democrats 

William Allen, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows : 

I live in Markle, Huntington county, In- 
diana, and am a blacksmith. I have been 
acquainted with Dr. Zumro seven or eight 
years. I am acquainted with his reputa 
tion for truth and veracity, and that repu- 
tation is bad; I would not believe him 
under oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I belong to the Democratic party I 
think Dr. Zumro's reputation in the neigh- 
borhood in which he lives may be as good as 
my own. I have never heard Mr. Cotfroth 
say in the Common Pleas Court, of our 
county, that he would not believe him un- 



170 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



der oath. I am not a member of the Or- 
der of Sons of Liberty, nor of the Circle of 
the Mighty Host. 

William Wolf, a witness for the accused, 
•was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows : 

I live in Rock Creek township, and am 
a farmer. I am acquainted with the repu- 
tation of Dr. Zumro for truth and vera- 
city in tho neighborhood in which he lives. 
That reputation, from what I have learned, 
is bad, and I would not believe him under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I belong to the Democratic party. I 
joined a secret society that, I think, was 
called the Circle of the Mighty Host, but 
I only attended one meeting. I never 
learned what was the purpose and object 
of the order, and I left it because I thought 
it did not amount to much. I understood 
it was a loyal organization. 

W. M. SwASEY, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows: 

I reside in Huntington, and am a phy- 
sician and surgeon. I have practiced medi- 
cine for twenty years. I have been Mr. 
Milligan's physician since I have been at 
Huntington — though Dr. Layman has at- 
tended Mrs. Milligan. Mr. Milligan was 
taken sick in August, and consulted me be- 
fore he went to the Chicago Convention ; 
he again consulted me after his return. 
My first charge I notice is for the 7th of 
September. About the 12th of September 
I first visited Mr. Milligan, when he was 
confined to his bed with bilious intermit- 
ting fever of the nervous character, which 
had assumed a typhoid form. I had to ad- 
minister calomel, mercurials and opiates. 
He was consequently very nervous and ir- 
ritable, and was scarcely rational any part 
of the time I was there during my daily 
visits. I continued to treat him up to the 
time he was arrested, and though much 
improved, he was then very feeble. On the 
12th, when I commenced giving him opium 
and morphine with mercurials and qui- 
nine, and for ten days from the 12th, he 
was continually under the influence of an- 
odynes. During this time he was what 
might be called flighty. 

George Bailey was then recalled as 
a witness for the Government, and testified 
as follows : 

The witness was requested to look at 
the following obligation, and state if that 
was the obligation of the Mighty Host. 

The following oath, purporting to be the 
obligation administered to the Knights of 
the Golden Circle in De Kalb and Allen 
counties, Indiana, was then read by the 
Judge Advocate: 



"I, , do solemnly swear, in the 

presence of Almighty God, that I will go to 
the relief of all good and loyal Democrats, 
and will not sufier the confiscation of their 
liroperty, either North or South; and I fur^ 
ther promise that I will sutler my body to 
be severed in four parts, one part to be cast 
out at the east gate, one part out at the west 
gate, one part out at the north gate, and 
one part out at the south gate, before I will 
suffer the privileges bequeathed by our 
forefathers to be blotted out or trampled 
under foot forever. I further promise and 
swear, that I will go to the aid, from the first 
to the fourth signal, of all Democrats, North 
or South. I further promise and swear, 
that I will not reveal any of the secrei 
signs, passwords, or grips, to any one not 
legally authorized by this order to receive 
the same, binding myself under no less a 
penalty than having my bowels torn out, 
and cast out to the four winds of heaven ; 
so help me God. I further promise and 
swear, that I will do all in my power to 
bring all good Democrats into this Circle of 
Hosts. I further promise and swear, that I 
will do all in my power, by all honorable 
means, and all other means in reach, to sub- 
vert, or overthrow, the present damnable, 
Yankee, Abolition Administration; so help 
me God." 

I do not think this is the obligatioii 1 
took; nor do I ever remember hearing of 
such a one. The obligation I took agreed 
to sustain the Constitution of the United 
States, and the Constitution of Indiana. 
The penalty for revealing the secrets of the 
society, was, that we were to be torn into 
four parts. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Monday, the 21st of November, 1864, at 
2 o'clock, P. M. 

Court Room, Indian.^polis, Indiana, \ 
November 21, 1804, 2 o'clock, P. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the Judge 
Advocate, the accused (except W. A. Bowles), 
and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

The following dispatch was then read to 
the Court by the Judge Advocate: 

"Washington, D. C, November 18, 1864. 
" To Major JI. L. Burnett, Jwl<jc Advocate: 

" This is authority iVom the Secretary of 
War to retain Colonel Ansel D. Wass, 60th 
Massachusetts, as member of Court-martial, 
as requested in your telegram of yesterday, 
to Judge Advocate Cieneral. 

[Signed] "THOS. M. VINCENT, 
".1. A. G." 

The ibllowing was then submitted by the 
counsel for the accused, WiUiam A. Bowlea^ 
" To the President and Memhers of the Military 

Cknnmission : 

" 1 hereby waive any objection to the ab- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



171 



Bence of Colonel A. D. Wass, 60th Massa- 
chusetts, during the past few days ; and do 
now consent to his taking his seat as a 
member of the Commission, and request 
that he may do so ; and I hereby waive all 
objections that might otherwise be raised 
against his remaining on said Commission, 
until the close of my trial ; and legalize and 
sanction the same as far as my request and 
full consent thereto can possibly do. 

[Signed] "W. A. BOWLES. 

"November 21, 1864. 

[Signed] "J. W. GORDON, 

"M. M. RAY." 

Colonel Wass, being present in Court, by 
consent and expressed desire of all the ac- 
cused, then took his seat as a member of 
the Commission. 

William Hines, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : 

I live in Green county, in this State, and 
am a farmer. I am acquainted with the 
accused, Andrew Humphreys. I have 
known him from twelve to fourteen years. 
Politically, we do not agree. I know that 
!Mr. Humphreys has abused the Adminis- 
tration since the war broke out. Since that 
time I have heard him deliver two political 
speeches. In the first speech I heard him 
make, he criticised the acts of the Govern- 
ment pretty severely. Speaking in relation 
to the draft, and obedience to the law, he 
used about this language: "I advise no man 
to resist the draft, nor evade any law passed 
by Congress, but I advise all to be good, law- 
abiding citizens." That speech was made dur- 
ing the summer of 1863, in Green county, on 
what is called the Five Mile Prairie. It was 
delivered to the citizens of Washington town- 
ship; and there were, perhaps, one hundred 
or one hundred and fifty men and women 
there. In his remarks he paid a good deal 
of attention to the financial policy of Mr. 
Chase. He wound up by telling the people 
that they had better not resist the draft, or 
the law of the United States. There bad 
been some talk about house-burning, and I 
remember Mi-. Humphreys directed his re- 
marks to me in his speech, and said that he 
would knock the chunk out of any man's 
hand that would attempt to set fire to my 
property, or to any Republican's property. 
I think I was the only Republican at the 
meeting. The next occasion on which I 
heard him, was about the middle of Sep- 
tember last, a few days prior to his arrest. 
He was speaking to the citizens of Green 
and Sullivan counties. This speech was 
made in the town of Linton. I was only 
passing by, and heard but part of it. A good 
many people were present. I heard him 
say that resistance to the Government 
would not do at all, in any shape or form. 
That resistance was sure to bring disaster 
upon them. That they must remain at 



home, and quietly submit to the laws of the 
Government. I believe he proposed to re- 
ceive money to pay for substitutes for 
drafted men, who could not aflford to get 
them themselves. I may have heard him 
speak five minutes; 1 was sitting on my 
horse at the time ; I did not hear any one 
else address the meeting. He exhorted 
them to obey the laws. There seemed to 
be some excitement among a part of those 
who were present, and I think it was in re- 
gard to the resistance of the draft. I so 
judged from what I heard them say. The 
reason why the people were " down " on 
him, as I understood, was for advising them 
to submit to the draft. Mr. Humphreys 
has for years been an active Democrat, and 
has usually taken an active part in all polit- 
ical matters in the county. He is a man of 
influence in the party. I believe Mr. Hum- 
phreys' reputation is that of a moral man ; 
I do not know that he is a religious man, or 
that he makes any pretensions to religion. 
As to his political principles, some of my 
friends call him a "Butternut" and a "Cop-- 
perhead," and even a "traitor," speaking of 
him politically. Outside of mere political 
controversies, I believe that the majority of 
his neighbors consider him a loyal man. 

William Johnson, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows: 

I reside in Green county, Indiana. I am 
a farmer. I am acquainted with Andrew 
Humphreys; I live about a mile and a half 
from where he does business, and about six 
miles from his residence. I have known 
him for ten years. I am acquainted with 
his general reputation and moral character, 
and as a law-abiding citizen, and it is good. 
Politically, I diflPer from Mr. Humphreys. 
His general reputation outside of what 
politicians say in our county, and so far as I 
know, he is respected by both parties. I 
heard him make a speech, I think, in August 
last, in Linton, Green county. It was de- 
livered to the citizens of Green and Sullivan 
counties. It was a Democratic political 
meeting. Mr. Burton, of Sullivan, spoke. 
Mr. Humphreys, in his remarks, quoted 
from Jefterson's writings, and from Washing- 
ton's farewell address; and he spoke of se- 
cession as the right of a State. 

He uttered no sentiment or exhortation 
to the people to resist the laws, or to oppose 
the Government. Mr. Humphreys has 
always expressed himself personally to me 
in favor of obedience to the laws. 

Q. State whether or not Andrew Hum 
phreys in the localities of Green and Sulli 
van counties has, according to your obser- 
vation, been engaged in exciting and in- 
flaming, or allaying the passions of the 
people ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo 
cate, and withdrawn. 



172 



TREASON TUIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



CROSS-EXAMIXATIOX. 

In Mr. Humphreys' speech, I understood 
him to argue in lavor of the right of a Statf 
to secede, and that secession, therefore, was 
right. I can not say that he endeavored to 
convince the people of this in his speecli, 
but such seemed to be the inference from 
tlie extracts which he read. Among the 
people of our county, the character of Mr. 
Hiunphreys is not considered loyal. 

RE-EX.\MIXATIOIf. 

"When I speak of those who do not con- 
sider Mr. Humphreys loyal, I mean the 
Union party, and it embraces some Demo- 
crats. 1 only consider those loyal who are 
in favor of the prosecution of the war for 
the suppression of the rebellion. That is my 
only test of loyalty. 

Q. Did he argue that while the Federal 
Government could enforce its laws against 
itHliviihM/.s, tliat yet there was no power to 
coerce iStatcs in their sovereign capacity ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

The Conunission then adjourned, to meet 
on Tuesdav, November '2'2, at 10 o'clock, 
A. M. 



Court Room, Isni.\s.\poi.is, Isiuana, ( • 
Kovember 22, 1S(>4, 10 o'clock, A. M.) 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused (except W. 
A. Bowles), and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

William C. Kocher, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
!^worn by the Judge Advocate, testitied as 
follows: 

1 reside in Huntington county, and prac- 
tice law. 1 am Mayor of Huntington bor- 
ough. 1 have known Mr. Milliiian for ten 
years; and am acquainted with his general 
moral rejiutation. in the neighborhood in 
which he lives; that reputation is good. 
His rejiutation also as a peaceable, orderly, 
law-abiding citizen luis been good in that 
conununity as far as 1 know. The relations 
existing between myself and ^Ir. Milligan 
pince the summer of 1855, have not been 
iViendly. 

CROSS-EXAMIXATION. 

The reason why my relations have not 
b^en very friendly with ^Ir. Milligan are, 
that when 1 Ci\me to huliana, a young man 
and a stranger, Mr. Milligan was one of the 
older members of the bar. and he took a 
strong position against me. I am not aware 
that he had any reason for so doing. He 
opposed other young attorneys in that place 
in like manner. His opposition took the 
form of brow-beating when 1 appeared as 
counsel on the opposite side. In politics I 



am a Democrat, though I do not belong to 
Mr. Milligan's party; 1 am a War Democrat. 
In saying that Mr. Milligan's general char- 
acter is good, 1 do not refer to his reputation 
as a loyal man in the support of his (lov- 
ennnent. 

JosKPii Johnson, a witness Jbi- the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testitied asVollovrs: 

I reside in Wells county ; my occupation 
is farming. 1 am acquainted with Dr. 
Zumro, of Markle; I have known him some 
ten years. I an; acquainted with his gen- 
eral reputation for truth and veracity in 
the neighborhood in whicli he lives, and 
know that that reputation is bad, and I 
could not believe him under oath. I be- 
came a member of the Sons of Liberty 
about June or July last, in Kockcreek town 
ship. Wells county. 1 was initiated in com- 
pany with Dr. Zvnnro, John Hautz, Isaac 
Decker, Henry Johnson and Nathan John- 
son; 1 joined at the solicitation of Dr. 
Zumro. Dr. Horton, who initiated us, told 
us it was an organization to support the 
Constitution of the United States, and the 
Constitution of the State of Indiana, and to 
protect the rights and liberties of the peo- 
ple at the ballot-box. He said nothing 
about the organization being intended to 
subdue the Abolitionists, resist the draft, or 
assist the Southern Confederacy. The mil- 
itary part of the organization was gotten 
up by Dr. Zumro, or, at any rate, the sub- 
ject was introduced by him, but for what 
purposes I can not tell. I went with Dr. 
Zumro, at his request, in September, to see 
Mr. Milligan. Dr. Zumro asked him what 
we should do about the draft ; Mr. Milligan's 
reply was, "We can not do any thing." Dr. 
Zumro asked what the boys were doing 
about Huntington; his reply was, "They 
are doing the best they can, iliey are hiring 
substitutes, and every man is taking care of 
himself in the best manner he can.'' The 
Doctor said, " I do not like to submit to the 
draft myself, but 1 think it would be a poor 
chance tor a man to try to get away. ' Mr. 
Milligan replied, " If I were to make an 
attempt to get away, I would not be afraid 
of twenty men arresting me." Nothing 
was stated to the etlect that if a revolt was 
started by ten men, others would Hock in 
in large numbers ; Mr. Milligan at the time 
was very sick on his bed. The Doctor spoke 
a few words to him, and he replied that he 
was very weak, and did not wish to con- 
verse. Dr. Zmmo stated to me, after leav- 
ing Mr. ^lilligan, that if he was drafted he 
would take n\edicine and be sick all the 
time, and if 1 was drafted he would serve 
me in the same way. When Dr. Zumro 
asked Mr. Milligan what the order was going 
to do about the diaft, to the best of my 
recollection Mr. Milligan said that the order 
was tlisbanded. and that he could not ex 
pect any thing from it. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



CROSS-EXAMIXATIOX. 

Lh\ the morning of the day on which I 
saw Mr. MiUigan, I called at Dr. Zumro's 
house, as we had arranged the night before 
at a meeting of the Sons of Liberty; some 
twenty-five or thirty members were present, 
and John Hautz, who was the Grand Seign- 
ior, presided. At that meeting Dr. Zumro 
wa.^ requested by some membei's to go to 
Huntington to see Mr. MiUigan, and the 
Doctor invited me to accompany him. It is 
eleven miles from where I live, and we 
went on horseback. The meeting was held 
at Jacob Farling's, Koekcreek township, 
Wells county, and Dr. Zumro was the only 
member present from Huntington county. 
I never attended any meeting at Hunting- 
ton township, I think that Mr. MiUigan 
had said that the order was disbanded ; it 
was not at that time in our township; I did 
not, however, so state to Mr. MiUigan. Dr. 
Zumro was appointed by the meeting in 
general, as a committee to visit Hunting- 
ton ; at the same time Jacob Farling was 
sent to Blutfton to see what they were going 
to do about the draft, 1 suppose. Nothing 
was said in the meeting, to my knowledge, 
as to what they were to be sent for, or who 
they were to see; and it was only as we 
were going along, that Dr. Zumro said that 
he thought Mr. MiUigan was about as good 
a man to see as we could go to. The mili- 
tary article which Dr. Zumro introduced to 
the order, he said, was written by Mr. Mil- 
ligan ; at the next meeting he pretended 
Mr. Ibach wrote it; I do not remember 
how many members signed it ; I did ; but T 
never drilled. There was no rule requiring 
us to drill. I have no arms, except a rifle 
and a revolver, which I have had for some 
years. The draft was frequently spoken of 
by members, but no decision was come to. 
Some talked of hiring substitutes, and oth- 
ers proposed running otf. Something might 
have been said about resisting the draft, 
but not by the leaders of the organization. 
Some said, " I will resist;" some, "' I will 
tight or run off." On our return from Hun- 
tington we met Mr. Samuel Day ; but I did 
not say to him or to Mr. Coftroth, or Mr. 
Winters, whom we saw afterward, that Mr. 
MiUigan had advised resistance to the draft, 
nor did I hear it said by any body. Mr. 
CotiVoth, I remember, advised us to go home 
and rest easy about the draft, or something 
like that.* 

Samurt. Winter s, a witness for the accused, 
was then introcFuced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows : 



* In giving the testiuiouy of unimportant witnesses, it 
has been the aim of the Editor to ouiit all irrelevant 
matter, or matter that did not elicit, or confirm, some 
fact inquired for. The record of the examination of this 
witness — an exceediugh' ignorant one — fills thirty-nine 
pages of legal cap, averaging two hundred words to a 
page, but the brief synopsis here given contains all the 
facta to which he tesl:ified. 



I reside in Huntington, Indiana, where 
I publish the Huntington Dcmot-rat, a Dem- 
ocratic newspaper. I became a member 
of the American Knights — but not of the 
Sons of Liberty — in Huntington, sometime 
in October, 1863. Mr. MiUigan was a mem- 
ber of that association, but held no office. 
He used his influence to prevent any but 
responsible and respectable men from be- 
coming members ; I never knew of any ef- 
forts on his part to extend the organization 
or establish branch temples. The order 
was disbanded sometime in April, and wo 
ceased to meet as an organization. It never 
was merged into the Sons of Liberty. I 
was a delegate from the Huntington tem- 
ple to the Council held here in February; 
Mr. MiUigan was not present; I know it 
from the fact that I asked him to attend 
with me, and he declined on account of 
being too unwell. I attended the meeting 
of the Council on the afternoon of the 17th ; 
I know nothing of Mr. Milligan's appoint- 
ment as Major General. 

I am only slightly acquainted with Dr. 
Zumro; I know him when I see him. In 
September last he called at my office in 
company with another man, and asked me 
what the order was going to do about the 
draft: [ asked "What order?" He then 
asked, "What are the boys going to do 
abovit the draft ?" I said, " Ido not know." 
I inquired, " What do you propose to do ?" 
His reply was, "to resist it;" to which I 
rejoined, " If you think so, why the devil 
don't you resist it?" I had no knowledge 
at the time of the part he was playing, 
but I did not trust him, and did not want 
to have any thing to do with him. 

I understood the object of the Order of 
American Knights was to disseminate cor- 
rect political principles in relation to the 
theory of our Government; and also as an 
offset to the Union League in our county. 
I understood it to be a purely political or- 
ganization, and it had no avowed purpose 
of resisting the draft or any law of the 
Government. 

1 was present at the Fort Wayne meet- 
ing, and heard the whole of Mr. Milligan's 
speech. It was in his usual style, elaborate 
argument, and, as I thought, not suited 
to the occasion, and was not calculated to 
create any enthusiasm among the ma.sses. 
Nothing was said denunciatory of the Gov- 
ernment. Mr. MiUigan always separated 
the Administration from the Government; 
whetlier he did in that speech or not, I can 
not distinctly remember. I believe he 
stated that opposition would occur under 
any Administration, and that if there were 
any present who expected him to arraign 
the Administration, they would be disap- 
pointed, as he would Ipave that to persons 
who delighted to arraign it. He spoke of 
coercion ; he denied the power of the Gov- 
ernment to coerce States, but admitted its 



174 



TREASON TRIALS AT mCIANAPOLIS. 



power to coerce individuals. Nothing to 
my recollection was said calculated to ex- 
cite insurrection, or resistance to the draft; 
if any thing had been said, I should proba- 
bly remember it. I made a report of that 
speech at the time, but have not consulted 
it recently. I have been intimately ac- 
quainted with Mr. Milligan since the fall 
of 1858, and I know his general reputation 
as to moral character in that community; 
it is good; and also his reputation as a 
peaceable, law-abiding citizen, which is also 
good. 

Q. Are you acquainted with his general 
character as a loyal man, well disposed to 
the preservation of the Government ? 

A. I do not know what you mean by the 
word "loyal." I am acquainted with his 
general reputation for attachment to the 
general principles of our Government, and 
its preservation ; it is good. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I understand Mr. Milligan to be in favor 
of the Union of the States, but I do not 
know that he is favor of the prosecution of 
the war for the suppression of the rebel- 
lion. In conversations which I have had 
with him, he has always maintained that a 
war waged against foreign States was an ab- 
surdity, and I have heard him say that he 
was against the present war, because it was 
an unconstitutional one. He is, therefore, 
opposed to the prosecution of the present 
war, and I have heard him say so. He 
said at the Fort Wayne meeting, that the 
existing war was an absurdity. He said tJiat 
if the war was right, the draft was right; 
but he did not say that if the war was 
wrong, the draft was wrong. I never saw any 
thing of the military part of the order 
until I saw it in the public prints. The 
purpose of the order was the inculcation 
of correct opinions or principles of Govern- 
ment, among which were the Kentucky 
Resolutions of 1798. These resolutions I 
understand give the States the right to 
judge of their own grievances, that they 
are on an equality with the General Gov- 
ernment, and are co-equal with it, and may 
be so construed as to give them the right 
to dissolve the contract. I was initiated in 
the three degrees of the order by Dodd, 
who took us through the three degrees the 
first evening. I took the obligation and as- 
sented to its principles. The expression, 
'' the Supreme Commander shall be Com- 
mander-in-chief of all military forces be- 
longing to the order, in the various States 
when called into active service," I consid- 
ered a figurative expression. I remember 
this part of the obligation which I sub- 
scribed to: 

"I do further promise, that I will, at all 
times, if needs be, take up arms in the 
cause of the oppressed — in my country first of 
a/^against any monarch, prince, potentate, 



power, or government usurped, which may 
be found in arms, and waging war against 
a people or peoples, who are endeavoring to 
establish, or have inaugurated, a govern- 
ment for themselves, of their own free 
choice, in accordance with, and founded 
upon, the eternal principles of truth, which I 

have sworn in the V , and now in this 

presence do swear, to maintain inviolate 
and defend with my life. This I do prom- 
ise, without reservation or evasion of mind; 
without regard to the name, station, condi- 
tion or designation of the invading or co- 
ercing power, whether it shall arise within 
or come from without." 

I do not know that it had any reference 
to an attempt to establish a government 
within this Government. I did not under- 
stand that the order was to assist in the 
establishing of the Southern Confederacy ; 
1 did not understand it so, nor do I believe 
that they have established a separate Gov- 
ernment; they have established a sort of a 
Government, but I do not understand that 
it is their intention to absolve themselves 
frona their allegiance to the old Union of 
the States. I believe if the Constitution 
was construed as the Supreme Bench con- 
strued it in the Dred Scott case, they would 
come back to the Union. I do believe that 
they are waging war to establish a separate 
Government, but that they intend to come 
back to the Union. I do not think that 
the President of the Southern Confederacj', 
when he said that they were trying to es- 
tablish a separate Government, represented 
the people of the South. I could not say 
that any prominent man in the' South has 
said other than that they were fighting to 
establish a separate Government, but I have 
read something from Alexander H. Stephens 
in which he does not say they will not come 
back ; and though he may not have said a 
word in favor of it, he has said nothing 
against it. There is not, to my recollection, 
any thing he has said in favor of any peace, 
save on the terms of equality. I do not 
believe that the Southerners are fighting 
for a separate Government, but for the Con- 
stitution as interpreted by the Dred Scott 
decision. That decision is in relation to 
their slave property — they want guarantees 
to protect it in transit through the States, 
and the right to take it into the Territo- 
ries. This is my own judgment. I have 
also seen it advocated in public prints, more 
especially the New York Day Book. I re- 
collect reading copious extracts from South- 
ern speeches, avowing that they were not 
fighting for a separate Government. I as- 
sert that the South has been fighting for 
their rights as defined in the Dred Scott 
decision, and I regard the reason of their 
flying to arms to obtain that which they 
already had a right to, by the decision of 
the Courts of the land, with the whole ex- 
ecutive power of the Government pledged 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



175 



to enforce it; that they supposed their 
rights would not be sufficiently respected 
to suit them ; and I do not think the de- 
cision in that case was enforced to suit 
them. 

Q. Can you tell when and where that de- 
cision was not enforced ? 

Question objected to by the accused, for 
the reason that it was not pertinent to the 
question in issue in this trial. 

The Judge Advocate said : 

This witness has undertaken to state that 
Mr. Milligan was loyal in his sentiments, 
reputation and character, and devoted to 
the maintenance of the laws and Constitu- 
tion of his country; and he further said, 
that the order had nothing in it but a sim- 
ple exposition of the theories of the Gov- 
ernment, as held by certain persons. I 
deem it material to show this Court that 
Ml". Milligan's principles were opposed to 
the Constitution, and to the very life of the 
Government itself; that the theories pro- 
mulgated in this order were false, disloyal, 
and destructive of the foundations of good 
order and of society. That the foundations 
of the order were lies, and that it was trea- 
sonable in its very inception and organiza- 
tion. This goes to the very foundation of 
tlie issue. It becomes material to show 
what these principles were. It is important, 
further, in this view: they call members of 
the order as witnesses, who swear that this 
order is loyal ; that there is no harm in it, 
so far as they knew. We must get at the 
foundation of their belief, to judge of the 
credibility and force of their testimony. 
Without doing this, the Commission can 
not judge what principles, theories, or acts, 
they believe to be loyal, and what disloyal. 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. 

On reopening the Court, the Judge Ad- 
vocate announced that the objection had 
been overruled. 

The Commission then adjourned, to 
meet on Wednesday, November 23, 1864, at 
9 o'clock, A. M. 

CoTjBT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
November 23, 1864, 9 o'clock, A. M. ) 

The Commission met pursuant to ad- 
journment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Judge Advocate, the accused (except Wm. 
A. Bowles), and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

The examination of Samuel F. Winters, 
a witness for the accused, was then resumed, 
as follows : 

I can not state when and where the Gov- 
ernment has failed to execute the deci- 
sion of the Dred Scott case, but there are 
personal liberty bills or statutes in most of 
the free States, which are a nullification of 
that decision, at least in Wisconsin, New 
York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Massa- 



chusetts, and I think in Pennsylvania and 
Maine; and it is my impression that these 
States punish any person who assists in the 
capture of an escaped slave. 

Q. Do not these bills expressly state, and 
are they not expressly for the punishment 
of kidnapping in violation of the laws of 
the State? 

Question objected to by the accused, and 
withdi-awn. 

I took notes of the speech of Mr. Milli- 
gan at Fort Wayne. I am not a short 
hand reporter, but I am a rapid writer, and 
I wrote down as much of the speech as I 
could in long hand, giving the substance of 
it as I could recollect. 

Q. Do you recollect whether this portion 
of Mr. Milligan's speech is as he gave it: 
"They (the States) were thirteen nations, 
and finally formed a Constitution, adopted 
separately by the several States, Virginia 
reserving to herself at any time to withdraw 
from the Union, and what Virginia re- 
served all the States had a right to reserve. 
Their action was based entirely on State 
rights. The Declaration of Independence 
states who is to be the judge when the Gov- 
ernment shall be subverted. It guarantees 
to the people the right of revolution when 
they can no longer tolerate the invasion of 
their rights. I do not mean that Governor 
Morton, or the Legislature, or any ma- 
chinery of office, getting its authority from 
the people through elections, is the State. 
But I mean the free range of all its people 
is the State. The officers are the mere ser- 
vants of the people, the mere agents of the 
Government. Where does sovereignty rest? 
It is time to settle this question. If you 
are wrong in your theories, you should 
change your principles. I know no sover- 
eignty in the Federal Government, or in 
the State Government, as contra-distin- 
guished from the people of the State. I be- 
lieve in the doctrine of popular sovereignty, 
instead of sovereignty in the machinery of 
the Government." 

I think that is the substance of what Mr. 
Milligan said on that subject. 

Q. Do you recollect this portion of Mr. 
Milligan's speech, and whether it • is cor- 
rect? 

"If we have no power to make war upon 
a State that secedes, was it right to take up 
arms against a people who were doing what 
they contracted to do, and what your fath- 
ers and our fathers did eighty years ago? 
Was it right? How many believe it was 
right ? If it was right, shoulder your guns, 
and go forward, and don't growl about the 
draft." 

In speaking of the draft, I think he said 
something like that ; that if the war was 
right, the draft was right; that the burdens 
of the Government should rest equally upon 
all; and that you might as well leave it to 
the voluntary act of citizens to raise the 



176 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



revenues of the country, as to raise an 
army by volunteering, or something like 
that ; the deductions that 1 made from his 
speech were that the war was unconstitu- 
tional. 

Q. Did he use these words: ''Was it right 
because you were more peaceable than your 
neighboring States, and unwilling to rebel, 
to compel them by force of arms to re- 
main your partners ? When you have an- 
swered that question, I am ready to talk 
about the draft." Is that correct? 

A. I do not think that corresponds with 
my report, and I do not think he said it. 
I have not a copy of the paper, in which 
the speech was reported, with me, nor do I 
know that I have a copy on file at my 
office. Mr. Milligan has occasionally writ- 
ten communications for my paper, but he 
has never written any of its leaders; they 
were letters referring to local matters. He 
wrote several communications last winter, 
but perhaps not more than a dozen alto- 
gether. I was present at the Grand Coun- 
cil that met here on the 17th. 1 went to 
see Mr. Milligan before I came here; I 
wanted him to go with me, but he felt too 
sick. I brought a series of resolutions; 
they were given me by Colonel Milligan, 
but I did not see them, nor did I read 
them; certain resolutions were read at the 
meeting of the Sons of Liberty. I do not 
know in whose handwriting they were. 

[A paper containing certain resolutions 
was here handed to the witness by the 
Judge Advocate.] 

These resolutions were adopted at Fort 
Wayne, but whether or not these are the 
ones I brought 1 can not say. These, to 
the best of my recollection, are the resolu- 
tions which were read at the meeting of 
the Order of American Knights. 

Government exhibit "A" was here hand- 
ed to the witness by the -Judge Advocate. 

Q. Are the resolutions in this book the 
same that you heard read at the February 
meeting of the Sons of Liberty? 

A. I believe they are the same, but I 
could not state positively whether they are 
or not, 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

The resolutions to which reference has 
been made, that were read at the Fort 
Wayne meeting, I think, are nearly like 
the resolutions of the 11th Democratic Con- 
gressional Convention assembled at Hun- 
tington. I only know that certain resolu- 
tions were contained in the envelope which 
Mr. Milligan handed me, and I know that 
in the pamphlet reierred to, certain resolu- 
tions are printed that were read before the 
Grand Council, but 1 can not say positively 
that they are the same. 

G. R. CoRLEW, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 



I reside in Huntington county, Indiana, 
and am Deputy Sheriff in that county. T 
have been in the hardware business. I 
moved to Huntington in the spring of 1843, 
and have lived there since. I have been 
acquainted with Mr. Milligan for the past 
sixteen years, and know his general moral 
character in the neighborhood in which he 
lives; I should call it good. I am acquainted 
with his general reputatior. as a peaceable, 
orderly, law-abiding citizen, and it is good. 
I joined an order called the American 
Knights, in October or November, of 1S63, 
at Huntington. Mr. Milligan was connected 
with the organization. I attended most of 
its meetings, till sometime in April, 1S64, 
when we quit meeting. I think about 
twenty or twenty-five belonged to it. I 
never knew of Mr. Milligan making any 
efforts to increase the number of members, 
nor was he in favor of organizing branch 
temples throughout the country; the only 
members that he seemed willing to admit 
were good, reliable and responsible men. 
As far as I understood tlie organization, it 
was entirely political, and was to be an offset 
to the Ll^nion League. The object of the 
organization was to influence elections, and 
to get Democrats to stick together, so as to 
carry elections, and not by force of arms or 
any thing of that kind. I never knew any 
thing as to its military organization. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I know nothing of the purposes of the 
order, save what I have mentioned; I never 
heard any thing about arms or ammunition, 
nor of any attempt to establish a North- 
western Confederacy. I joined in October 
or November, 1863, and continued a mem- 
ber till it was broken up, in March or April, 
1864. I think 1 took three degrees in the 
order, but 1 never attended any meetings, 
save tliose of our own assembly. For a part 
of the time 1 acted as treasurer, and re- 
ceived probably fifty or sixty dollars, with 
which 1 bought wood, and the rest had to 
be expended in the rent of the hall, lights, 
etc.; none of the money collected was, as 
far as I know, sent to the Grand Council. 
I know of no assessments having been made 
on our members for money. I "know noth- 
ing of members of the order pledging them- 
selves to each other that they would resist 
the draft. I have heard other individuals 
talking about it, and 1 told tliem it was 
nonsense to resist. I never recollect taking 
an obligation of which the following is a 
part : 

" I do further promise that I will, at all 
times, if needs be, take up arms in the cause 
of the oppressed — i)i mi/ country Jirst of all — 
against any monarch, prince, potentate, 
power, or government usurped, which may 
be found in arms, and waging war against a 
i^cople or peoples who are endeavoring to 
establish, or have inaugurated, a govern- 



TREASON TKULS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



177 



ment for themselves of their own free choice, 
in accordance with, and founded upon, the 
eternal principles of truth, which I have sworn 
in the V ." 

I will not swear that I did not subscribe 
to that obligation, but I do not remember. 
If it was read to me, I swore to it. 

Samuel F. Day, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : 

I reside at Huntington, Indiana, where I 
have hved for four years. I am engaged in 
the livery business. I am acquainted with 
the general moral character of Mr. Milligan 
in that county, and it is good as far as I 
know. I am acquainted with his general 
reputation as a peaceable, orderly, law-abid- 
ing citizen, and that reputation is good. 

I joined a secret organization last Septem- 
ber, at Huntington, about the time Mr. 
Dodd made a speech there; I think it was 
called the Order of American Knights. We 
had meetings about once in two weeks up 
to the time we sent a delegate to Indian- 
apohs; from that time our meetings were 
irregular until March or April; and about 
the last of April the organization was aban- 
doned from want of interest in it by the 
members. Between twenty and thirty be- 
longed to it. It was a County Temple. I 
learned from Mr. Dodd that the organiza- 
tion was a political one. All the degrees I 
ever took, I took the first night. 1 suppose 
there were three degrees. The purpose of 
the organization, it was stated, was to con- 
solidate the Democracy, and to get influen- 
tial men into its ranks, so that we might 
influence the election, and carry the Demo- 
cratic ticket. It was also supposed that the 
organization would counteract the effect 
and purposes of the Loyal League in that 
county. I never learned any thing of the 
order being a military organization. I do 
not know of any attempts of Mr. Milligan 
to extend the order; I have known him to 
blackball members to keep them out, and 
I have known of his objecting to organizing 
branch temples ; I never knew of his assent- 
ing to but one, namely, at Rockcreek town- 
ship, Huntington county; they were organ- 
ized there, and had forty-five or fifty mem- 
bers. 

I am acquainted with Dr. Zumro, of 
Markle. I remember a conversation I had 
with him about the 16th of September, at 
Huntington. He and Mr. Johnson came 
to my stable door. Mr. Zumro stepped into 
my oSice, and stated that he had just come 
from Mr. Milligan's; he said that he and 
Mr. Johnson were appointed to come over 
to Huntington, to see what was to be done 
about the draft. Zumro said that Mr. Milli- 
gan did not give him much encouragement 
as he was sick, and told him to go to me. 
Zumro said, "AVe are bound to resist the 
draft, and we want to know if you can give 
assistance." I said it was foolishness and 
12 



nonsense to resist the draft; that fol ts were 
already making preparations to gel substi- 
tutes. We talked a few minutes, an;l when 
he went aw'ay, he said, ''I suppose v/e will 
have to give it up, as we can get no encour- 
agement here." I do not remember posi- 
tively whether he said "we" or "they' are 
bound to resist. 

C ROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I was elected Grand Seignior ot i.he or- 
ganization, and served for two or three 
months. The man who preceded me was 
named John Jones, but no one was elected 
to succeed me. The books and papers of 
the order were in the care of the Secretary, 
Mr. Cummings; Mr. Corlew was Treasurer; 
I do not know what became of the papers. 
I think there was a meeting in May, but I 
was not there. Mr. Milligan never gave 
any reason, that I remember, for not wish- 
ing to extend the order. He would often 
say when asked about establishing a branch 
lodge, "there is no use," or "do not be in 
a hurry." and the probability was that it 
would not be done. 

I never heard of Mr. Milligan being ap- 
pointed a Major General in the order, until 
I heard it on the street. I heard nothing 
of the military organization of the order, or 
of its army ; Dodd said not a word about it* 
nor was any thing said about organizing a 
North-western Confederacy. I have heard 
Mr. Milligan speak in the lodge, or out of 
it, of the manner of conducting the war; 
and he approved of it, if it was conducted 
on a right policy, namely, for the Union. 
He objected to it, so I understood, because 
it was prosecuted for the abolition of slavery, 
and he believes that the Union could be 
restored by better means than by war. 

When Dr. Zumro said "they" or "we" 
are going to resist the draft, Mr. Johnson 
said nothing to contradict it, that I remem- 
ber. I think Zumro also stated that Mr. 
Milligan had said " we must do the best we 
can," or something to the eflfect that each 
one would have to take care of himself, and 
do the best he could; but he did not say 
that Mr. Milligan advised him to resist. 

OcHMiG BiKD, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 

I reside in Allen county, Indiana, and am 
a farmer. I am a member of the Legislature. 
I was present at Fort Wayne, at the Demo- 
cratic Convention, on the 13th of August 
last, at wliich Mr. Milligan spoke, but I was 
not by Ml'. Milligan all the time he was 
speaking. It was called a mass meeting for 
the people of the county. Mr. Milligan was 
one of the invited speakers. Mr. Millij^an's 
was an argumentative speech on the sub- 
ject of States rights, and the rights of the 
Constitution. It did not elicit much enthu 
siasm from the audience. I judge it had 
an adverse tendency. Mr. Milligan did not 



178 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



denounce the Government, but he did speak 
against the Administration, and the man- 
ner in which the war was conducted; and 
I understood him to discriminate between 
the policy of the Administration and the 
Government. 

I took one degree in the organization 
called the Sons of Liberty. Its purposes, as 
I understood then, were to rally the strength 
of the Democratic party. The entire 
strength of the order might have numbered 
about fifty or sixty persons. There was an 
impression in our place that the Loyal 
Leagues were armed. We found some 
papers that they had dropped around re- 
quiring a very strict organization; it was 
also reported that they intended to usurp 
unreasonable authority at the polls; and 
one of the objects of this organization was 
to stand by and see that the people had a 
fair chance at the election, and that no in- 
roads were made on our party in delivering 
their votes. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

In Mr. Milligan's argument at Fort 
Wayne, as I understood it, he did not just- 
ify the States in the right to secede. His 
argument went to prove that there was a 
certain way to settle these things peaceably 
between the States and the Government. 
My impression is that he did not consider 
this a constitutional war, from the manner 
in which it was conducted, and he may 
have said that the war itself was wrong — 
that fighting for the coercion of seceded 
States was unconstitutional, but I am not 

Eositive. I am under the impression that 
e treated the States as already out of the 
Union, and the Union dissolved; but I did 
not understand him to say that there was 
no power in the Government to bring them 
back. 

I do not know that I have, in conversa- 
tion, expressed the view that a State had 
the right to secede, and that there is no 
power in the Government to coerce it back 
after having seceded ; those are not my 
views. I think it possible that a State may 
be coerced, though I do not entirely believe 
in the prosecution of the present war for 
the suppression of the rebellion; but I am 
in favor of it if prosecuted under constitu- 
tional principles. 

Q. What would be a constitutional prose- 
cution of this war? 

Objected to by the accused, for the rea- 
son that the politics of the witness are not 
u subject of inquiry before this Court. 

The Judge Advocate replied: 

The question seems to me to be relevant, 
Mid most material ; and I insist upon its 
being put. The accused bring witnesses 
iiere to prove a good character for loyalty, 
and the law-abiding nature and conduct of 
the accused, Mr. Milligan. If they saw 
proper to bring upon the stand a member 



of the rebel army, and ask him whether 
Mr. Milligan was a law-abiding, lo/al man, 
his test of loyalty would be the lict that 
any man living in this Governmett would 
permit those States to secede, and establish 
a Government ibr themselves, and not in- 
terfere with them. 

In speaking of the speech at Fort Wayne, 
this witness states that Mr. Milligan's speech 
had no tendency to create insurrection, that 
it separated the Government from the Ad- 
ministration, etc. The only way to get at 
the foundation of these speeches and acts, 
is to find the basis, or premises, fi'om which 
the witnesses drew their conclusions. It is, 
therefore, important, when they bring wit- 
nesses upon the stand to prove the loyalty 
of any speech or act, to get at the stand- 
point from which the witness himself judges 
of loyalty. 

This question goes to show the principles 
of the witness, and his theories of Govern- 
ment, and enables the Commission to find 
out what he believes to be constitutional, 
and what, in his judgment, is loyal, and 
what disloyal. 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. 

On reopening the Court, the Judge Ad- 
vocate announced that the objection was 
overruled. 

The Commission then adjourned to 2 
o'clock, P. M. 

AFTERNOON SESSION. 

CouKT KooM, Indianapolis, Indiana, ) 
November 23, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. J 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the Judg(^ 
Advocate, the accused (except W. A. Bowles), 
and their counsel. 

The testimony of Ochmig Bird, a witness 
for the accused, was resumed, as follows : 

As a Democrat, I think the President of 
the United States has exceeded his power 
in requiring the abolition of slavery, as the 
right to hold slaves is guaranteed by the 
Constitution to every person who holds 
slaves. I think, therefore, the Emancipa- 
tion Proclamation is unconstitutional ; out- 
side of this proclamation I am in favor of 
the suppression of the rebellion, though I 
am by no means strenuously in favor of the 
war, for I believe in settling the diflBculty 
by conciliation and compromise. I am not 
in favor of letting the rebel States go, but I 
am in favor of the union of all the States ; 
I am in favor of prosecuting the war, if that 
is the only alternative, and I am in favor 
of coercion, if that be necessary for the 
preservation of the Union. 

We had a Democratic majority of twenty- 
seven hundred at the last election in ovur 
county. We organized this society to pro- 
tect ourselves against the Loyal Leagues. 
Some of the leading members who belong 



TREASON TKIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



179 



to ihe organization, are Mr. France, who is 
the principal oflBcer, Mr. Dills, Secretary, 
Mr. Walkie, Mr. William Jones, Mr. John 
Murray, Mr. Marshall Noll, Mr. Hogan and 
Mr. James W. Borden. 

B. F. Ibach, a witness for the accused, was 
then introduced, and, being duly sworn by 
the Judge Advocate, testified as follows : 

I reside in Huntington, Indiana, and 
have lately been admitted to the bar in our 
county. I joined a secret political organi- 
zation in September, 1863. I was initiated 
on the day that Mr. Dodd addressed the 
Democratic Convention at Huntington. 
The objects of the organization were set 
forth in certain declarations of principles 
which were read to us, and which I under- 
stood to be to advance Democratic princi- 
ples, as we understood them, and also to 
counteract the influence of a society called 
the Loyal League. It was a purely political 
organization. I continued to attend its 
rueetings till May; at that time it had died 
out entirely. In connection with the soci- 
ety of American Knights, we had lectures 
every two weeks, and no one was permitted 
to lecture unless he indorsed the declara- 
tion of principles taught in the order. I 
was a delegate from that county temple to 
the Grand Council which met here in June. 
Mr. MUligan and myself came together, 
but he did not accompany me to the Coun- 
cil. I reached the city a little before noon 
on the first day of the meeting. We had a 
meeting on that and the next day. I re- 
member at this meeting a young man from 
the northern part of the State was very 
uneasy about the draft, and thought the 
order should do something. This is tho 
first I learned that there was any idea 
among the members that there was a mili- 
tary part connected with the order; he 
seemed to be very uneasy about the draft, 
and thought that we ought to combine. A res- 
olution was offered by some member of the 
Council, which was voted down ; the reso- 
lution was to the effect that the different 
temples in the counties should organize for 
the purpose of resisting the Government. 
It created quite a turbulent time there; 
some thought that the order was purely 
political, and others that there was a mili- 
tary branch in it. The majority of the 
members did not want any military action, 
but preferred to wait for a change through 
the election. The resolution, I remember, 
was voted down. They thought the ballot- 
box was the remedy for our troubles. I do 
not remember that Mr. Milligan took 
any part in the discussion. It was at this 
meeting that Dodd, or the Deputy Grand 
Commander, I forget which, said that they 
had taken into consideration the appoint- 
ment of military officers, and that some of 
those appointed had not accepted their of- 
fices, and others had not been heard from. 
There was then a discussion whether their 



action should be secret, and confined to the 
Grand Commander and themselves, or 
whether it should be known to the mem- 
bers generally. Mr. Dodd said there were 
some things about the order which all the 
members need not know. Others said that 
the whole Council should know what was 
done, and should not be confined to single 
individuals. Mr. Dodd said that the ap- 
pointment of major g^aierals would have to 
remain as reported until the 4th of ouly, 
if they did not re})ort then, others would 
have to be appointed. Mr. Dodd did not 
press the matter then, because he saw it 
did not suit the Council, and that they 
would have voted the military part of it 
down. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I took the three degrees of the order all 
at one time. Part of the degrees were not 
read; only the obligations. The means by 
which Mr. Milligan and myself received 
notice of the meeting of the Councu here 
in .lune was this: a notice was sent o the 
order in Huntington, addressed to its sec- 
retary, that we were to appoint delegates to 
that meeting of the Council. This was re- 
ceived in May, and we came up here to 
the State Council on the 14th of June. We 
had a meeting of the order in May, and I 
was appointed a delegate, and though our 
order died out in Huntington, I was here 
on the 14th representing it. Mr. Milligan 
was present at the first day's meeting. Mr. 
Humphreys I did not see here either day. 
I do not remember Mr. Dodd making use of 
any such expression as this: "I will now 
iick down the thin walls of patriotism and 
talk treason for a while.' I remember they 
had quite a discussion on the subject of 
the grievances which the Government had 
inflicted, but could not come to an under- 
standing about the matter. 

The ascendency in the meeting seemed 
to be of those who concluded that we 
should rely on the ballot-box as a remedy 
for the evils we suffered. There was also 
some expression of opinion in favor of 
McClellan as candidate for the Presidency; 
they were in favor of the nomination of a 
man who favored the prosecution of the 
war. 

Dodd and the Deputy Grand Commander 
were not in favor of the prosecution of the 
war, and I think were hostile to the Admin- 
istration. I think from what Dodd said, 
that the appointment of the military offi- 
cers was within his province. None of our 
organizations drilled as far as I know. I 
had a preamble for organizing a company; 
the list had fifteen or twenty names upon 
it, some of whom were members of the 
order; we intended getting seventy-five 
members, and then organizing under the 
State law, and drawing our arms from the 
State, in accordance with an act of the Leg- 



180 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



islature; my luvine, 1 believe, was at the 
head of the company. It was first com- 
menced some eifxhteen months back, a long 
time before I belonged to any secret organ- 
ization. We intended to drill; our object 
was to protect oiii-.selves against the soldiers 
that were coming home. Some citizens, 
also, had made liireats against our printing 
otfice, and we thought it best to take the 
arms in our own hands. Quite a number 
if our friends had received letters from 
<oiuiers in the army, saying that when they 
came home, they were going to take care of 
what they were pleased to term the Copper- 
•leadei. Another reason why we contem- 
plated protecting ourselves was that the 
Home Guards had been furnished witli arms, 
ind we thought that we had the same 
right to the State arms as they had. Had 
we been furnished with arms, our company 
would have been a Home Guard, to guard 
ourselves against what we called encroach- 
ments on our rights. 

Captain Samuel Place, jr., a witness for 
the accused, was then introduced, and, 
being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, 
testih'^d H,s follows: 

I am Captain in the 5th Veteran Reserve 
Corps, stationed at Burnside Barracks, In- 
dianapolis. I Avas in command of the 
squad of men who arrested Mr. Milligan at 
his house in Huntington county, Indiana. 
I made the arrest on the authority of a 
written order from Major General Alvin 
P. Hovey, which was as follows : 

Headquaeters Distetdt of Indiana, 1 
ludiaiiapolis, October 5, ISCA. j 

Special Order No. 142. 

6. Captain Samuel Place, jr., 5th Eegt. 
V. R. C, with the force under his command, 
will proceed to Huntington, Huntington 
county, and arrest L. P. Milligan, and bring 
him to these Headquarters without fail. 

By order of Brevet Major General Alvin 
P. Hovey. AND. C. KEMPER, 

Assistant Adjutant General. 

The above was then offered in evidence 
by the accused. 

G. R. Corlew, a witness for the accused, 
was then recalled, and testified as fol- 
lows: 

I have heard Mr. Milligan say that he 
was born in 1812; he is therefore fifty-two 
years old. I have known Mr. Milligan for 
•» sixteen years, and I never knew of his 
being in the military or naval service of the 
United States. 

Moses W. Mnxicw, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being 
July sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
an follows: 

I reside in Huntington, Indiana, and am 
a son of L. P. Milligan. On the •evening of 
Tuesday, the 16th of February, my father 
started to come here to Indianapolis; he 



went to the train, but it was crowded, and 
he returned home. My mother asked him 
the reason he did not go, and he said he 
was sick. On the next day, the 17th, he wa« 
at Court at Huntington. My father was 
not from home during the month of Feb- 
ruary, to my knowledge. The Common 
Pleas Court was first held, and the Circuit 
Court immediately afterward ; and my father 
was in attendance during both terms, as 
far as I recollect. I was present at both 
Courts as acting bailifi'. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I do not think my father was away from 
Huntington more than one day during the 
month of February ; he was sick more or 
less the whole month of February. I can 
not state what he was doing on particular 
days. I am enabled to fix the date of the 
16th of February, by knowing that a meet- 
ing of the Sons of Liberty was to be held 
here on that day, and that my father in- 
tended to be present, and he went to the 
cars on that day. I remember Mr. Win- 
ters went. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
Friday, November 25, at 2 o'clock, P. M. 

Court Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
November 25, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the Judge 
Advocate, the accused, and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

Edward Price, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 

I reside at Sullivan. Sullivan county, In- 
diana; I am Clerk of the Court at that 
place. I am acquainted with the accused, 
Andrew Humphreys; I have known him 
about twelve years. I was present at a 
meeting at a place called Caledonia, in June, 
1S63. I went there with Mr. Cowgill. On 
the morning of that day, two or three citi- 
zens of that township came to Sullivan and 
requested some of us to come down and see 
if we could not quell a disturbance that was 
going on there ; they said, " Let some Dem- 
ocrats and Republicans go out and talk to 
the crowd, and see if they can not allay the 
disturbance." That was the purpose for 
which I went. I understood the excite- 
ment was occasioned by some soldiers, who, 
getting off the cars, went to the house of a 
Mr. Wagner, and asked for his horse. Mr. 
Wagner was not at home, and his wife told 
them they could not have it, but they went 
into the stable and took it. They also shot 
at a man by the name of Pigg. When I 
received this notice, I got my horse and 
carriage to go out there. Mr. Cowgill, wlio 
was introduce^ to me by Mr. Wolf, the old 
clerk of the county, went with me. There 
were two or three carriage loads that went, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



181 



but we were ahead of all the rest. About 
a mile and a half from Sullivan we met the 
soldiers coming back. Mr. Cowgill stopped 
Bomo. of them and talked for a few minutes. 
He asked something about the excitement. 
I think he told them the best thing they 
could do was to go on to Sullivan, get on 
the cars and go home. I think he also told 
them that they had done wrong in taking 
away property without the consent of the 
owners. 

We went on to Caledonia; when we got 
there, Mr. Humphreys was speaking to the 
crowd ; they seemed to be very much exci- 
ted when we drove up. I don't know how 
many there were present; perhaps about 
two or three hundred. I got out of the 
buggy and handed the lines to Mr. Cowgill. 
I went up to Mr. Humphreys and told him 
that the Deputy Provost Marshal was there, 
and asked him to come out, and I would 
give him an introduction. He stopped 
speaking for a few minutes, and I went out 
wnth him and introduced him to Mr. Cow- 
gill; they walked into the crowd while I 
was hitching the horse. Mr. Humphreys 
spoke a little while to the crowd after that, 
and then introduced Mr. Cowgill ; Mr. Cow- 
gill got up and made a few remarks, advis- 
ing the crowd to go home and disperse, that 
they had done wrong in taking the prop- 
erty, and told them the best thing they 
could do was to take Mr. Humphreys' ad- 
vice and go home, and not be the cause of 
making any disturbance. Mr. Humphreys 
said that, as the soldiers were gone, there 
was no use of any excitement, and that the 
best thing they could do was to go home. 
I was walking around in the outskirts of the 
crowd, and was not paying a great deal of 
attention to what he did say. I think some 
of the crowd said they would follow the 
soldiers ; that was the thing Mr. Humph- 
reys advised them not to do. My opportu- 
nities for knowing what was going on, were 
good, as I was in the crowd all the time 
until we got into the carriage to go back. 
I do not remember Mr. Humphreys saying 
any thing about the Administration or the 
Government. He did not speak more than 
ten or fifteen minutes after I got there. 

I was at the meeting in Jackson town- 
ship in the September of 1863. Mr. Humph- 
reys, Mr. Hammill, Captain Mandrell, S. Gr. 
Burton and myself, spoke. Captain Man- 
drell, it was said, was a rebel that had been 
captured at Fort Donelson, and had taken 
the oath of allegiance at Indianapolis. It 
was reported that he had been engaged here 
as clerk in the Quartermaster's oflBce. He 
was in the Kecorder's office, at Terre Haute, 
when I got acquainted with him; and he 
was the agent for some Illinois company for 
awhile. This was a political meeting — a 
Democratic picnic. 

I am acquainted with the moral charac- 
ter of Mr. Humphreys, and it is good. I 



am also acquainted with his general char- 
acter, as a law-abiding man, and it is good. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I reside twelve or fifteen miles from Mr. 
Humphreys, and I have often been at his 
house. I was a candidate on the Demo- 
cratic ticket in the fall of 1863. In politics 
I am of the same principles as Mr. Humph- 
reys, and my speeches, I presume, would be 
of the same class as his. Captain Mandrell, 
I do not think, spoke more than five min- 
utes at the meeting I have alluded to. I 
do not remember what he said. Mr. 
Humphreys' speech was about like Demo- 
crats usually make. As I was a candidate 
at the time, I did not pay much attention 
to what was being said; I was more inter- 
ested in myself than any body else. I 
joined an order called the Americati 
Knights, in August, 1863. I was initiated 
by P. C. Wright, at Terre Haute. 1 re- 
mained in the order until I was elected, in 
October, when I had nothing more to do 
with it. I took three degrees. 1 joined 
the order for fear they would defeat me. 1 
have always been opposed to secret political 
organizations, not thinking that they were 
right, and 1 might have done what 1 be- 
lieved to be wrong, for the sake of being 
elected. 

S. Gr. Burton, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 

I reside at Sullivan, SulUvan county, In- 
diana, and practice law in that town. I am 
intimately acquainted with Andrew Hum- 
phreys, and have been for the last five years. 
I made a speech at Linton, in August last. 
It was at a large mass meeting; Mr. Hum- 
phreys followed me. 

Q. You may state the substance of his 
speech, if you recollect it ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

Q. In the course of that speech, what did 
Mr. Humphreys say in relation to the Gov- 
ernment and the right of secession ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate. 

The counsel for the accused said : 

This witness is brought on the stand to 
testify in behalf of the accused, Andrew 
Humphreys, and we have a right to interro- 
gate him as to Mr. Humphreys' speeches. 
That course of examination has not been 
objected to, up to this time. We introduced 
three gentlemen from Mr. Humphreys' 
neighborhood. One of them testified to 
the speech made in August last. We 
proved that speech as indicative of the 
sentiments which he offered to the people 
for their guidance. We have a right to 
prove what the accused has said, urged and 
enforced upon the peoi^le as their path of 
duty; the Court may determine whether 
his sentiments were loj'al, or di.sloyal. We 



182 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



propose to prove by this witness that he 
pursued a particular line of argument. That 
he read from Washington's Farewell Address, 
and from Jefferson's writings, to enforce the 
same views. One witness stated that he 
understood Mr. Humphreys endeavored to 
support his argument for secession by the 
authority of Washington and Jefierson. No 
principle of law is better settled, than the 
right, as declared in the Statutes of Indiana, 
that a party may always, in the event of a 
witness being mistaken in his deductions, 
of having his errors corrected by other wit- 
nesses. If one witness is mistaken in a 
particular point, the defendants have the 
right to prove the whole facts in the case 1 
by another witness, that the Court may de- 
termine what is right and what is wrong. 
We had the right, first, to fortify one wit- 
ness by corroborating testimony as to what 
Mr. Humphreys said, and show that all he 
uttered was manifestly in favor of preserv- 
ing the integrity of the Government Sec- 
ondly, we had the right to prove what act- 
ually took place, to rectify what the other 
witness said about the speech. 

One of the charges against the accused is 
that of making inflammatory speeches. We 
have a right to meet and to disprove this, 
and the law fixes no limit to the number of 
the witnesses that we may call. 

The Judge Advocate replied: I under- 
stand the rule to be, that when they prove 
any particular statement to have been muue 
by the accused, they are entitled to call out 
the entire statement. The Court has further 
ruled, that any acts or speeches made by 
the accused, at any meetings of the order, 
to show whether such acts were for a good 
or bad purpose, would be received as evi- 
dence; but I do not understand the Court 
to go so far as to say that because we proved 
that in the fall of 1863, certain treasonable 
speeches were delivered by the accused, 
that they can introduce, as rebutting testi- 
mony,, loyal speeches made in 1864. We 
have introduced no witnesses as to speeches 
made in 1864. We certainly did obtain 
from one witness of the accused, in his cross- 
examination, that Mr. Humphreys, in 1864, 
spoke on secession, saying that a State had 
a right to secede; that in affirmation of his 
views he read from Washington's Farewell 
Address, and from Jefferson's writings. They 
are attempting to put a witness on the 
stand to testify to that whicli we have not 
introduced on the part of the Govornment. 
They can not disprove the di.sloyal utter- 
ances of 1863, by proving loyal speeches in 
1864. 

As to when one witness may be brought 
in to contradict anotlier, Koscoe, in Cri7n- 
inal Evidence, page 178, says: 
■ "Whether the party calling a witness, 
who gives evidence contrary to what is ex 
pected from him, may prove contradictory 
statements previously made by the witness 



is a question on which there has been some 
difference of opinion." 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. 

On reopening the Court, the Judge Advo- 
cate announced to the accused that the ob- 
jection had been sustained. 
Question by the accused: 
What did Mr. Humphreys say in that 
speech about secession? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate as illegitimate, and as already passed 
upon. 

The counsel for the accused replied : 
On the discussion of the right of seces- 
sion, a man may speak of that right and 
not be in favor of it. In this country, it is 
a matter of opinion whether a man is for 
his Government or against it. It is not 
treason to maintain one side or the other 
of this question of secession; for in 1825 a 
very distinguished lawyer, who was long a 
servant of the Government, wrote a treatise 
on the Constitution of the United States, 
in which he justified and maintained the 
right of Slates to secede, under the Consti- 
tution, and denied the right of coercion. 
I always thought, and I think so still, that 
this gentleman, Mr. Rowle, of Pennsylvania, 
was greatly mistaken. But no man doubt- 
ed the loyalty of his heart or his life, until 
the days when treason was inaugurated in 
this country. 

De Tocqueville, in his Democracy in Amer- 
ica, maintains it as an original proposi- 
tion, that there can be no contest for the 
enforcement of the Union ; that it is not 
a contest between the Government on the 
one side and the seceding State or States 
on the other; but that States seceding have 
the same interest to maintain secession, 
that the adhering States have to resist it, 
because it is a question of self-interest to 
each party. The General Government is 
dissolved. 

We claim that we have the right to in- 
troduce tcstiniony to show the loyalty of 
Mr. Humphreys, from the present time back 
to the organization of the order, at Terre 
llautc, as the testimony on the part of the 
Government goes back to this time. 

The case of Home Tooke is to the point. 
He was on trial for treason. He goes far 
back of the commencement of the prose- 
cution, and finds a book that he had writ- 
ten in favor of the sovereign. In that book 
lii.s loyalty is fully established, and he in- 
troduces it to show that he could not have 
had the intent, as alleged, of destroying 
the life of the King. It was admitted as 
evidence in his favor, and though Lord 
Ellenborough afterward questioned the cor- 
rectness of the decision, it has not been 
reversed. It followed and reversed the de- 
cision in the case of Lord George Gordon, 
tlie decision in Lord George Gordon's case 
being decided in 1780, and the trial of 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



183 



Home Tooke following fully fourteen years 
after, during the turbulent scenes of the 
French Revolution. 

The following is from Russell on Crimes, 
vol. 2, pp. 780-781 : 

"And, as in trials for conspiracies, what^ 
ever the prisoner may have done or said,, 
at any meeting alleged to be held in pur- 
suance of the conspiracy, is admissible in 
evidence against him, on the part of the 
prosecution; so, on the other hand, any 
other part of his conduct at the same 
meetings will be allowed to be proved on 
his behalf; for the intention and design of 
a party, at a particular time, are best ex- 
plained by a complete view of every part 
of his conduct at that time, and not merely 
from the proof of a single and insulated act 
or declaration. In the case of "Walker and 
others, who were tried for a conspiracy to 
overthrow the Government, evidence was 
produced on the part of the prosecution 
to show that the conspiracy existed, and 
was brought into overt acts at meetings in 
the presence of Walker, the counsel for 
the prisoners was allowed to ask a witness, 
whether, at any of these times, he had 
ever heard Walker utter any word incon- 
sistent with the duty of a good subject? 
The question was opposed, but held by Mr. 
J. Heath to be admissible. The prisoner's 
counsel were also allowed, in the same 
case, to inquire into the general declara- 
tions of the prisoner at these meetings, 
whether the witness had heard him say 
any thing that had a tendency to disturb 
the peace of the kingdom ; and questions 
to the same effect were put to many other 
witnesses in succession. 

"On the trial of Hardy for high treason, 
where the overt act charged was that the 
prisoner, for the purpose of accomplishing 
the treason of compassing the King's death, 
did conspire with others to call a conven- 
tion of the people, in order that the con- 
vention might depose the King, the coun- 
sel for the prisoner were allowed to ask a 
witness, whether, before the time of the 
convention, he had ever heard from him 
what his objects were, and whether he had 
at all mixed himself in that business. But 
the better opinion seems to be, that in or- 
der to make such other acts or declarations 
of the prisoner applicable to his defense, it 
must be shown that they are in some way 
connected with the facts that are proved 
against him. In the case of Home Tooke 
and others, however, for high treason, sev- 
eral publications having been given in evi- 
dence on the part of the crown, containing 
republican doctrines and opinions, the dis- 
tribution of which had been promoted by 
the prisoners, during the period assigned in 
the indictment for the existence of the 
conspiracy, the prisoner was allowed to 
read, in his defense, various extracts from 
works which he had published at a former 



period of his life ; and these the jury were 
permitted to carry along with them, when 
they retired to consider their verdict. But 
the propriety of allowing such a defense 
has been questioned by very high au- 
thority." 

The first question we present to tha 
Court is, whether we have a right to prove 
by this witness that facts were different 
from what the other witness said they 
were. On that question I wish to cite au- 
thority. We called Mr. Johnson's atten- 
tion to the meeting and the sentiments 
expressed by Mr. Humphreys about the 
Government. The witness stated that Mi\ 
Humphreys made a speech. The Judge 
Advocate asked if he spoke in favor of the 
right of secession ? He answered, he did. 
We now introduce a witness who made a 
speech at the same time and place, and 
who heard what Mr. Humphreys said. We 
introduce him not to contradict what other 
witnesses have said, but to show the real 
facts of the case. 

Roscoe says, page 178: 

"But where a witness is called and 
makes statements contrary to those which 
are expected from him, the party calling 
him may prove the facts in question by 
other witnesses." But it is stated that this 
decision applies only to the direct examin- 
ation. It is not limited to that. In exam- 
inations as to character, we are confined to 
two questions. In cross-examination we 
are not so limited. Suppose on re-examin- 
ation, a witness clings to a mistake made 
in his direct examination, and we could pro- 
duce a hundred witnesses to pi'ove a con- 
trary state of facts, should we be bound by 
his statements, and cut off" from correcting 
his mistake ? If so, no man would be safe 
in introducing witnesses as to character. 

Eminent authorities say on this point: 

" Where a witness gives evidence against 
the party calling him, and is an unwilling 
witness, or in the interest of the opposite 
party, he may be asked by the party calling 
him, at the discretion of the Court, whether 
he has not on a former occasion given dif- 
ferent testimony as to a particular fact. 
Bcmk Northern Liberties vs. Davis, 6 Watts & 
Serg., 285. 

"A party may prove the fact to be dif- 
ferent from what one of his own witnesses 
has stated it to be. That is not discrediting 
his witness. Spencer vs. White, 1 Iredelts K. 
O. Rep., 236. 

"A party can not discredit his own wit- 
ness or show his incompetency, though he 
may call other witnesses to contradict him 
as to a fact material to the issue, in order to 
show how the fact really is. Franklin Bank 
vs. Steam Nav. Co., II Gill <& Johns., 28." 

The same principle was decided in the 
case of Wrightvs. Beckett, I Moore & K, 416, in 
which Lord Denman held that a party call- 
ing a witness, who, on cross-examination, 



1S4 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



has given testimony unfavorable to him, 
may, on re-examination, ask the witness 
questions to show inducements to betray 
him. * * * An opinion adverse to the 
right of a party calHng a witness to con- 
tradict him, by his own previous statement, 
lias been expressed by a writer of great 
authority. PhiU. Ev., 309, 7th ed. And this, 
the opinion, seems to have been followed by 
other text-writers. Mr. Phillips, however, 
in the last editions of his work appears to 
have changed his opinion, and observes that 
in the administration of criminal justice 
more especially, the exclusion of the proof 
of contrary statements might be attended 
with the worst consequences. Phill. on Ev., 
pp. 451, 9/A ed. 

I know that the Indiana Statutes are not 
authority in this Court, but its practice is 
supposed to be in harmony with the com- 
mon law on these questions, and in con- 
formity with the principles of humanity on 
which our Statutes are based. 

Section 244, of Part 1, page 172, reads: 

"The party producing a witness shall not 
be allowed to impeach his credit by evi- 
dence of bad character, unless it was indis- 
pensable that the party should produce him, 
or in case of manifest surprise when the 
party shall have this right; but he may, 
in all cases, contradict him by other evi- 
dence, and by showing that he has made 
statements dift'erent from his present testi- 
mony." 

The foot-notes to that section contain the 
following decisions: 

"The rule of common law is thus stated 
in Thompson vs. Blanchurd, 4 Comstock, 303. A 
party calling a witness can not impeach his 
character or assail his credibility by general 
evidence ; but he may prove by other evi- 
dence the truth of any particular fact in 
direct contradiction to the testimony of the 
witness." 

"The right of a party to contradict his own 
witness, by showing that he has made state- 
ments different from his present testimony 
{Civil Code, Sec. 660,) does not depend on the 
ability of the party to prove, in addition, that 
the testimony of the witness is untrue; but 
he may contradict him, Jirst, by other evi- 
dence; and, secondly, by showing that he has 
made statements ditierent from his present 
testimony. Either or both of these modes 
may be adopted. Champ, vs. Cornmonwealth, 
2 3fe(ca//, (A». 17." 

We were surprised by the testimony of 
this witness on the point of secession. 

In reviewing the wliole case, it seems that 
the public lil'e of Mr. Humphreys, for the 
time covered by the examination on the 
part of the Government, is on trial before 
this Court, and that whatever has been done 
or said at public meetings by him during 
that period is part of tlie res ge-sia: in this 
otfense. Therefore, we think we are right 
in attempting to introduce evidence to show 



what he said in Linton, about the Union 
and Government. The Government lias 
admitted evidence in reference to that meet- 
ing without objection, and, therefore, the 
whole of the facts in reference to it should 
come before the Court. It is necessary that 
we be permitted to introduce other witnesses 
to show what Mr. Humphreys said in that 
speech. If we can do this, it wiD enable U8 
to coi'rect any wrong impression which may 
have arisen from the answer, "Yes, sir," to 
the question, "Did he say secession was 
right?" Now, in the present state of the 
country, such a declaration would not be 
expected to come from a loyal source, but 
would be considered disloyal, and showing 
a disposition to enter into such an associa- 
tion as this secret order has been claimed 
to be. 

The Judge Advocate replied: 

I desire to correct a misapprehension, 
frequently entertained, and which appears 
to exist here, that the Judge Advocate is 
counsel for the accused as well as for the 
Government. His position is exactly de- 
fined by the Articles of War, which say that 
he " shall so far consider himself as counsel 
for the prisoner, after the said prisoner shall 
have made his plea, as to object to any lead- 
ing question to any of the witnesses, or any 
question to the prisoner, the answer to which 
may tend to criminate himself" When the 
accused came into Court ably represented 
by counsel, I feel that the defense of the 
accused rests uj^on their shoulders, rather 
than on mine. I do not act as counsel for 
the accused in this case. On all questions 
of law, I put them on an equal footing with 
the Government, but in questions of fact, I 
act only for the Government, and leave the 
accused in the hands of their counsel. 

I had supposed that the point at issue 
was already disposed of by the decision of 
this Court. Its ruling I understood to be, 
that what a man says, any statement he 
makes outside of the particular times and 
places proved by the Government, whether 
said to one person, or a hundred, is imma- 
terial, and every sentence of law, read by 
the accused, goes to this, and only this ex- 
tent, that all (he prisoner said at the par- 
ticular time proven by the Government, or 
while he was engaged in those particular 
proven acts, is competent. He can not go 
outside of that. 

Permit me to say one word on the doc- 
trine of the right of a State to secede, which 
is spoken of as oi^ly a political heresy. It 
is the heresy that has made a part of our 
land desolate. It is the phantom that has 
swept over one-half of the surface of our 
beloved country, leaving ruin in its wake. 
It has caused moaning and mourning 
throughout the whole land. Whetlier it is 
treason or not, it has caused the treason 
against which the nation is now struggling 
Tliis heresy contains the doctrine and prin 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



1?: 



K 



ciples, which, once acted on, constitute trea- 
son. You may advocate the right of seces- 
sion as a principle, and the moment you 
convince enough people of the truth of that 
principle, it ripens into action, and you pro- 
duce secession and disrupt the Government. 
When you convince a sufficient nuinber of 
the people of liidiana that secession is 
right, and that there is no power in the 
Government to coerce them, and prove to 
them that a North-western Confederacy is 
to their advantage, you lead them to actual 
treason, and pave the way for a division of 
the Government, to any extent that inter- 
est or caprice may dictate. From this her- 
esj" have culminated the wrongs under 
which the nation is now groaning. Hence, 
I dislike to hear counsel argue that a man 
has the right to talk in favor of secession, 
and claim that it is not wrong, or treason. 
He argued that Mr. Eawle had advocated 
the right of secession, and no man doubted 
his loyalty. But he did not believe this 
was treason, and did not know that it would 
be against Mr. Humphreys, that he argued 
in favor of this doctrine. If so, why does 
he try to rebut the remark of the witness 
that Mr. Humphreys said secession was 
right? This doctrine is the foundation- 
stone on which treason is built. The ques- 
tion is, whether he joined a treasonable so- 
ciety which had avowed its intention to 
disrupt the Government; which conspired 
for the establishment of a North-western 
Confederacy, and proposed to seize the ar- 
senals in the North-western States, release 
the rebel prisoners, and arm them to aid in 
this conspiracy; whether he had any knowl- 
edge of these purposes, and whether he 
was, by his membership and position, bound 
to assist in carrying out what this organiza- 
tion contemplated. 'J'hey can not disprove 
this fact, or rebut its force, by proving that 
at another time, outside of the order, he 
made loyal speeches. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I joined a society called the Sons of Lib- 
erty, at Terre Haute, in August, 1863, and 
took three degrees. I have not met with 
the order for about six months. I was 
called Ancient Brother in the order; the 
principal duty of which office was to admin- 
ister the obligations. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

I regarded this organization as having 
only a political object. I thought I under- 
stood all about it, but since the-se trials 
commenced, matters have been developed 
of which I knew nothing before. Although 
I have conversed with members of the or- 
der outside of my own county, I never was 
able to ascertain that its designs wei'e any 
other than to secure a better organization 
of the Democratic party; and I never knew 
of any thing more being revealed to third 



■than to first degree members ; T understood 
that the objects of the order were to bt 
secured through the means of the ballotr 
box. 

RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I had in my possession the ritual of the 
order. The ritual of the first degree 1 have 
read. 

The attention of the witness was called 
by the Judge Advocate to the following 
passage, which he was asked to explain : 

"10. Whenever the officials, to whom the 
people have intrusted the powers of the 
Government, shall refuse to administer it in 
strict accordance with its Constitution, and 
shall assume and exercise power not dele- 
gated, it is the inherent right and impera- 
tive duty of the people to resist such of- 
ficials, and, if need be, expel them by force 
of arms. Such resistance is not revolution, 
but solely the assertion of right." 

That has reference to counter revolution. 
When the political party in power begins to 
trample on the rights of other citizens, 
these can take their rights in their own 
hands, and defend them by force of ai'uis. 
My idea is, that it is right for every Ameri- 
can citizen to defend his rights by force 
when they are trampled upon, and it was 
one of the purposes of the order, that in 
case of such encroachments, it should resist 
by force of arms. They had apprehensions 
that the ballot-box would be interfered 
with, and, in case they were driven from 
the ballotrbox, it was their right to secure a 
free election by force of arms. If one class 
was driven from the polls to obtain the tri- 
umph of the other party, it was right for 
the party driven away to take up arms, and 
I suppose the passage quoted has reference 
to that, if such a state of things should 
arise. The passage has reference to th« 
exercise of powers not delegated; and I 
claim that the Government has assumed 
powers not delegated, and I suppose the 
order claims the same. 1 believe it was one 
of its principles that the Government had 
assumed too much power. 

Willis G. Neff, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows ■ 

I reside at Suilivan, Indiana, and am en- 
gaged in the practice of law. I know Cap- 
tain Mandrell, who has been spoken of in 
this case. I met him at Terre Haute, in 
the spring, in the Clerk's office, after the 
battle of Fort Donelson, and had some con- 
versation with him. He then told me he was 
released on taking the oath of allegiance. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
Monday, November 28, at 2 o'clock, P. M. 

In consequence of the absence of some 
of the members, the Commission adjourned 
over the 28th and 29th, to meet on Weanes- 
day, November 30, at 2 o'clock, P. M. 



186 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



OoiTBT Room, Indianapolis, Indiana, \ 
November 30, 1864, 2 o'clock, P. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the Judge 
Advocate, the accused ( except W. A. Bowles), 
and their counsel. 

The proceedings were read and approved. 

John Roach, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows : 

I live at Huntington, where I have lived 
for thirty years ; I am a farmer. I am well 
acquainted with the people living near 
Huntington. I have known Mr. Milligan 
since 1847 or 1848. He has been my at- 
torney for several years. I am acquainted 
with his moral character in the community 
in which he lives, and it is good. His gen- 
eral reputation as an orderly, peaceable, 
law-abiding citizen, is good. I never joined 
any secret organization. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Since 1854 or 1856 I have acted with the 
Democratic party, though not actively. I 
have never acted with the Republican 
partj'. I have heard Mr. Milligan make re- 
marks, in which he held that some of the 
officers of the Government were exceeding 
their authority, and he complained that 
they were not acting according to law. I 
never heard him speak of the executive 
officers of the Government as usurpers. I 
have never heard people of our community 
speak of him as a disloyal man. I do 
not think they regard him as more disloyal 
than other Democrats. Some of our citi- 
zens believed that every one who did not 
vote the Republican ticket was disloyal. I 
believe Mr. Milligan has been regarded as 
a leader of the peace wing of the Demo- 
cratic party. I have heard him spoken of 
as a " Butternut," but I have not heard of 
him working against the Government in her 
efforts to suppress this rebellion. Mr. Mil- 
ligan, I believe, has a worse reputation, per- 
haps, than other Democrats, because he 
has worked with more earnestness than 
others of the peace party. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Though I have voted with the Democratic 
party, I have assisted the Government in 
aiding in the enlistment of soldiers, and I 
have helped soldiers' families. As one of 
the largest tax payers of the county, I have 
gone before the board of County Commis- 
sioners and asked them to make appropria- 
tions to encourage enlistments, and for the 
support of soldiers' families. 

Wilson B. LooKRincE, a witness for the 
accused, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testi- 
fied as follows : 

I reside in Peru, Miami county, Indiana, 



and am now and have been, for the last two 
years, a lawyer. I am now the editor of 
the Miami County Sentinel — a Democratic 
paper. I have acted as Judge of the Court 
of Common Pleas for two terms. I have 
been intimately acquainted with Mr. Milli- 
gan since 1847 or 1848. I was two years a 
partner of his. I am acquainted with his 
general moral character in the community 
in which he lives, and it is good. I am also 
acquainted with his general reputation as a 
peaceable, orderly, law-abiding citizen, and 
it is good. I was, for a short time, a mem- 
ber of the Sons of Liberty. I was inform- 
ally initiated, and only attended one or two 
meetings. 

I attended a Council of the organization 
in this city in February last. I understood 
that the intention of the organization was 
altogether political; that it was intended 
to protect the members of the Democratic 
party against violence, which, it was thought, 
had been used against them in particular 
quarters; in short, to protect the Demo- 
cratic party and see that their rights were 
not trampled upon. Mr. Milligan was 
not present at the Council in February 
while I was there, which was the first day. 
I looked for him in the meeting, and heard 
one of the prominent members inquire for 
"Milligan;" the reply was that he was not 
there. There was nothing said about the 
appointment of Major Generals while I was 
there. I had not a great deal of faith in 
the matter. I did not know it to be what 
it purported to be, and I came to Indian- 
apolis more for the purpose of seeing into 
it than for any thing else, and from those I 
saw in attendance that day, I concluded 
that it would not be productive of much 
good After returning home, I had nothing 
more to do with it. 

Dodd and HefFren were the principal 
leaders, and I did not think they were fit 
persons to take part in such a thing. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I understood that we were to protect the 
rights of the Democratic party, in the event 
of their being kept away from the polls, 
with such means as were necessary to afford 
us protection. We were first to exhaust 
all peaceable means, and if these failed, to 
resort to the right of self-defense. I do not 
know that any precise means were deter- 
mined upon. Each member of the order 
had to judge of his own rights and the best 
means to maintain them, and when any 
member's rights were infringed upon, it 
was regarded as the duty of other mem- 
bers of the order to protect him — peacea- 
bly at first, forcibly if necessary. But there 
was to be nothing beyond acting in self- 
defense. I had learned of persons being 
attacked on account of their political prin- 
ciples, and being beaten and bruised; and 
if such a thing occurred again, I conceived 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



187 



it to be the duty of the order to protect 
such persons as were assailed. 

The civil law might have been sufficient 
to protect them, but there were many in- 
stances where it had not aflbrded protec- 
tion; I think if a man was attacked, he 
had the right to self-protection ; and it was 
upon this principle that the order was to 
act. When I attended the Grand Council 
1 gave no password; I was vouched for by 
some person at the door; I did not know 
that it was a rule that no person was ad- 
mitted to that body who had not taken 
three degrees. 

The following was then quoted by the 
Judge Advocate: "Whenever the officials, 
to whom the people have intrusted the 
powers of the Government, shall refuse to 
administer it in strict accordance with its 
Constitution, and shall assume and exercise 
power not delegated, it is the inherent 
right and imperative duty of the people 
to resist such officials, and, if need be, ex- 
pel them by force of arms; such resistance 
is not revolution, but is solely the assertion 
of right." 

I can not say whether I have heard that 
before or not. I probably did at Indianap- 
olis. There was something to that effect 
among the cardinal principles of the order, 
and 1 do not know that I have heard 
members of the organization dissent from 
it. I have expressed the same opinion in 
my paper, but I can not say that the order 
generally held to it as a principle, though 
it is my opinion it did. I have said that 
the President had exercised power that 
the Constitution had not given him, and 
used authority not delegated to him. 

I do not know that I have ever expressed 
myself to the effect that usurpation might 
reach a point where revolution would be 
necessary. 

Samuel McGaughey, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows : 

For fourteen years I have resided at 
Huntington, Indiana; am a farmer. For 
two years I served as Treasurer of the 
county. I became acquainted with Mr. 
Milligan soon after settling in Huntington. 
I am acquainted with his moral character; 
it is good; also with his reputation as a 
peaceable, orderly, and law-abiding citizen; 
it is also good. I became a member of a 
secret political society, in Huntington, about 
a year ago, but paid very little attention to 
the matter. I understood it to be purely a 
political association, and I remember the 
idea was suggested by some of the members 
that it was to counteract the influence of 
the Loyal League. 

Cutter S. Dobbixs, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
Bworn, testified as follows : 



I reside at Dover Hill, Martin county, In^ 
diana, and practice law. I have been ac- 
quainted with Stephen Horsey for nine or 
ten years. I am acquainted with his char- 
acter as a quiet, peaceable, law-abiding citi- 
zen, and it is good. 

Q. You may state whether Stephen Hor- 
sey is a man of influence in the neighbor- 
hood where he lives. 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

Harrison Connell, being recalled as a 
witness for the accused, testified as follows: 

I am acquainted with the character of 
Stephen Horsey as a peaceable, quiet, law- 
abiding citizen ; it is good. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

It was not extensively known in his 
neighborhood that Mr. Horsey got the pow- 
der and shot, about which I testified; and 
I do not know that such a fact would con- 
duce to his reputation as a peaceable, law- 
abiding citizen. I assisted in carrying the 
powder and lead from where it was con- 
cealed, but no one else knew of it, that I 
know. I do not know of his buying any 
more ammunition, or lead, or shot ; nor do 
I know of any attempts made by him to 
arra the order. I do not know that I ever 
heard any one say that he was disloyal to 
the Government. 

William M. Ranney, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, ajid, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows : 

I reside near Shoals, Martin county, In- 
diana; am a farmer. I am acquainted with 
the character of Stephen Horsey as a peace- 
able, quiet, law-abiding citizen, and it is 
good. I have known Mr. Horsey since 
1833. I joined a secret organization that 
was formed in April, 1863; Mr. Shirkliff', I 
think, initiated me. Mr. Horsey and sev- 
eral others were there. I do not know 
whether Wesley Tranter, or Stephen Teney, 
was there ; we met in a vacant house. The 
obligation we took, as I understood it, was 
to support the Constitution of the United 
States, and the State of Indiana. There 
was some other obligation, but I do not re- 
collect what it was. I did not meet with 
the organization after that night. 

cross-examination. 

The name of the order I joined was the 
Circle of Honor. At the time of Mr. Hor- 
sey' s arrest, some people talked pretty hard 
about him, as they have done since. 

re-examination. 

Those who talked hard about Mr. Horsey 
at the time of his arrest, were political op- 
ponents, who thought him guilty of what 
he was charged with. Up to the time of 
his arrest, his character for peace and qui- 
etness was good. 



188 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



The Commission adjourned, to meet on 
Thursday, December 1, at 10 o'clock, A. M. 



Court Boom, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1 
December 1, 1804, lU o'clock, A. M. j 

The Commission met pursuant to adjourn- 
ment. 

All the members present. Also, the 
Jvidge Advocate, the accused, and their 
counsel. 

The proceedings were read and apj^roved. 

General Alvin P. Hovey, a witness for the 
accused, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows : 

Question by the accused: 

State your name and official position? 

Answer. My name is Alvin P. Hovey. I 
am Commander of the District of Indiana. 

Q. State whether or not it was by your 
order that Mr. Milligan was arrested ? 

A. It was. 

Q. State upon what that order was 
based, whether upon affidavit made to you, 
or upon what it was based? 

A. It was based upon my general knowl- 
edge of affairs in Indiana, the condition of 
the country, and Mr. Milligan's action in 
regai-d to it, together with the dangei's that 
surrounded us at that time. 

Q. What actions have you reference to? 

A. To the conspiracies against the author- 
ity of the United States. 

Q. What particular actions of Mr. Milligan 
in the matter ? 

A. Mr. Milligan, I understood from reli- 
able authority, was a Major General of the 
organization, and had taken steps to aid it, 
and carry on revolution. 

Q. Please state to us the source of that 
information? 

A. The information generally came from 
Detectives. 

Q. State who they were? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

Q. Am I right in understanding you as 
saying that the order was not based upon 
an affidavit? 

A. It was not, sir. 

Q. State whether you have not made the 
ol'servation that Mr. Milligan was a dan- 
gerous man; if so, upon what information 
you made the remark? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

Q. Was this information from persons re- 
siding in Mr. Milligan's neighborhood, or 
elsewhere? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate, and withdrawn. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Question by the Judge Advocate: 
I suppose, General, the sum of the matter 
Wf\s this: that in your judgment it was neces- 



sary for tlie public welfare to arrest tliiB 
man, and upon that you moved? 

Question objected to by the accused, and 
withdrawn. 

The witness : 

1 would like to make this further explan- 
ation. The first person arrested by me, was 
Dodd , that arrest was made without con- 
sulting the authorities any-where. Subse- 
quently I made the others. In the first ar- 
rest, I took the resjjonsibility on myself; I 
was authorized by the War Department to 
make the subsequent arrests, and to take 
wh^-,'. action 1 might deem advisable in re- 
gard to it, and 1 did so. The testimony 
'vhich I have given with regard to these 
prisoners, applies to each and all of the 
others. 

M. 3. Brant, a witness for the accused, 
was thet. introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 

1 live in Huntington county, Indiana. 
Since the fall of 1844, I have been Auditor 
of the county. I became acquainted with 
Mr. Milligan in 1844, and since 1851 1 have 
known him intimately. In politics I am 
now a Eepublican and a Union man. In 
years past, 1 was an Old Line Whig. The 
first vote I ever gave was for Andrew Jack- 
son. I next voted ibr Martin Van Buren, 
next for Harrison, and since then I have 
been connected with the Democratic party. 
I am acquainted with Mr. Milligan's moral 
character in the community in which he 
lives, and it is good. I am acquainted with 
his general reputation as a law-abiding citi- 
zen; that reputation is good. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Mr. Milligan's character is that of a man 
who, till lately, has advised entire obedience 
to the law. The Democratic party still re- 
gard him as a law-abiding citizen, while 
Republicans speak of him as operating, of 
late, against the laws of our country. Re- 
publicans regard him as connected with a 
secret organization that is in favor of further 
secession among the States, and in favor of 
the establishment of a North-western Con- 
federacy. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

I think that that reputation is confined 
exclusively to the more rabid and bitter 
portion of the Republican party, and most 
of this reputation lias grown up since about 
the time of Dodd's arrest, and since the ex- 
jiosure of tlie members of the Sons of Lib- 
erty in the public print? ; though a year ago 
last fall Mr. Milligan made speeches, and 
some persons in the Republican party re- 
garded him as a man opposed to the Gov- 
ernment, and as seeking the establishment 
of a North-westei'n Confederacy. By oppo- 
sition to the Government, I mean opposition 
to Mr. Jjincoln's Administration. 

W. J. Smitu, a witness for the accused, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



189 



was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows: 

I am Clerk in the United States District 
Court, and have held that position since 
May, 1863. The business of the Court has 
in no way been interfered with. We have 
had our special and regular terms, and 
processes have been issued and retui'ned 
regularly. There have been one or two 
suits instituted for obstructing the processes 
of the Court, but the regular business of 
the Court has not been interfered with. 

Samuel Chandler, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows : 

I am Deputy Clerk of the United States 
Circuit Court, and have held that position 
since the 4th of February, 1863. The Court 
has been exercising jurisdiction in this 
State; since that time it has been open, 
and holding its regular sessions, and there 
has been no disturbance or civil commotion 
to interfere with the business of the Court, 
that I know of. 

D. Garland Rose, a witness for the ac- 
cused, was then introduced, and, being duly 
.worn by the Judge Advocate, testified as 
follows: 

I am United States Marshal for this Dis- 
trict, and have held that office since April, 
1861. I do not know of any obstructions 
to the serving of processes during the past 
year; I do not know of any suits now pend- 
ing in the Federal Courts for obstructing 
the service of process, though the District 
Attorney could answer that question better 
than 1 could. 

I know threats were made, and resistance 
was apprehended, but none was offered 
that caused any arrests to be made, that I 
know of 

Edward Harrison, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows : 

I live in Wells county. Union township, 
Indiana; I am a farmer, and at present sub- 
stitute in the army. I have known Dr. 
Zumro for five years; I live about three- 
quarters of a mile from him. I know his 
general reputation in the neighborhood in 
A-hich he lives, and that reputation is good, 
and from that reputation I would believe 
him under oath. 

cross-examination. 

1 am a Union man. Among those I have 
heard speak of Dr. Zumro, are Mr. Ratlift" 
and Mr. Cagger, both of whom are Union 
men Ratlift" said that he respected Zumro; 
that he was a man of principle, and could 
be depended upon. No inducements have 
been held out to me to testify as to Zumro's 
character. I have been pretty intimately 



acquainted with him; he has been xuy fam- 
ily physician. 

John Nave, a witness for the accused, was - 
then introduced, and, being duly- sworn by 
the Judge Advocate, testified as follows: 

Dr. Zumro has been my family physician 
for seven or eight years. I know his repu- 
tation for truth and veracity in the neigh- 
borhood where he lives, and it is good; I 
would believe him under oath. The class 
of men that have usually spoken against 
Dr. Zumro, belong to the Democratic party. 
I have not heard any body else say any 
thing against him. I, myself, belong to the 
Democratic party. 

cross-examination. 
I know that Dr. Zumro has had enemies 
in the medical profession ; I have heard men 
say that he was a great liar ; but it was by a 
Dr. Joseph Scott and others, who differ from 
him professionally, and it did not affect his 
character for truth and veracity. Before 
this controversy came up, I have heard Dr. 
Stockwell and Mr. Daniel Haeflee speak of 
him as a man of truth ; they always spoke 
well of him. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

Before these trials came up, I did not 
hear any one speak against Dr. Zumro, ex- 
cept for some special reason, or because he 
was a personal enemy. 

W. C. Smock, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows: 

I am Deputy Clerk of the Markle Circuit 
Court, and ex-ojicio of the Common Pleas 
Court. The courts of this county have 
been unobstructed in the exercise of their 
jurisdiction. 

David Stockman, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows : 

I live in Rock Creek township, Wells 
county, Indiana; I have been somewhat in- 
timately acquainted with Dr. Zumro for 
about three years. I live about a quarter 
of a mile from him. 1 know his reputa- 
tion for truth and veracity to be good, and 
would certainly believe him under oath. 
Politically I belong to the Democratic 
party. 

cross-examination. 

I have heard people speak against Dr. 
Zumro, and say that he was not a very 
good Doctor. I have not mixed much with 
the people of the neighborhood, but as far 
as I have heard, no one has spoken against 
him as a man of truth. 

Jacob Farling, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, was then introduced, and, being duly 
sworn by the Judge Advocate, testifier as 
follows : 



19: 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



I live in Hock Creek township, Wells coun- 
ty, Indiana. I am trustee of that town- 
smr>; i belong to the Democratic party, 
t^na joined the Sons of Liberty. I live 
about five miles from Dr. Zumro; have 
known him four or five years; he has been 
my Doctor; his reputation for truth and 
veracity in our neighborhood, where he 
doctors most of the people, is good as far 
as I have learned; the people of that 
neighborhood are mostly Pennsylvania 
Dutch. I did not hear any thing against 
his reputation before these treason cases 
came up; and I would believe him under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I have not heard Dr. Zumro' s character 
much discussed; it did not come up; I 
have not heard people speak against him 
until of late; since these cases came up, I 
have heard people speak ill of him. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

I never heard any thing said against Dr. 
Zumro, till he came on the stand and testi- 
fied about these Sons of Liberty. 

William R. Taylor, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows: 

I live in Eock Creek township, Wells 
county, in this State, and run a saw mill. 
I have acted as Justice of the Peace 
for two terms. Politically I am a Republi- 
can, and voted for the Union party. 1 
have been drafted, and am now a soldier. 
Have known Dr. Zumro ten years, dur- 
ing which time he has been my family phy- 
sician. 1 am acquainted with his general 
reputation for truth and veracity ; that rep- 
utation is good, and I would believe him 
under oath. 

R. C. Booking, a witness for the accused, 
was then introduced, and, being duly sworn 
by the Judge Advocate, testified as fol- 
lows: 

I am the inventor of certain Greek fire 
shells, and missiles of various kinds. I 
made a shell and ap^jlied for a patent, 
and had a caveat filed for it as well as 
for the Greek fire, which I invented, and 
which I claim to be the same as that used 
by the Greeks, and which burns under 
water. I have been traveling for the pur- 
pose of presenting my claims to the public, 
since the spring of 1863. Have been at 
Cincinnati, Louisville, Detroit and here. 
Being short of means, I was trying to find 
some person to assist me in getting my in- 
vention through. It was open to the pub- 
lic ; and 1 came here to try it by order of 
General Burnside. I brought it before 
A<^'utant General Noble, Colonel Freybar- 
ger, Major McClure, General Wilcox and 
his staff, Mr. Holloway, editor of the Indi- 
anapolis Journal, and I showed it every- 



where to the public. General Wilcox was 
Commander of this State at that time. I 
am not a member of the secret organization 
known as the Order of American Knights 
or Sons of Liberty, and never was. My 
Greek fire had no connection with the or- 
der, nor did 1 receive any assistance from it 
in any way. I know Dr. Bowles. He asked 
me, when in Louisville, if I would show 
him and his friends some of the shells and 
the Greek fire; I told him yes. In the af 
ternoon he came to my room at the Louis- 
ville Hotel, with several gentlemen, and 
I showed it and explained it to them. I 
told them it was a pity I could not get 
along with my inventions for want of 
means, and Dr. Bowles said he would 
see some of his friends and ascertain if 
something could not be done, so that I 
could get along with the shell. In the 
evening, when I was at the hotel, a young 
man came to me, and asked me to go up to 
Dr. Kalfus' oflBce; when I went up, some 
person, I did not know who, said to me, 
that some of the gentlemen to whom I had 
shown my inventions had agreed to help 
me, and they gave me a little paper with 
money in it, which I did not count until I 
got back to the hotel, when I found that it 
was in the neighborhood of two hundred 
dollars. 

This gift had no connection that I know 
of with the Order of American Knight«, 
or Sons of Liberty, and not a word was 
said about any thing of the kind. Nothing 
was said that I know of,, at the hotel, about 
using my invention for improper, disloyal 
or treasonable purposes; when the gentle- 
men talked together, they were quite far 
off from me, and they spoke very low. I 
was never in Salem, Indiana; though I 
may have passed through the place on ihe 
train ; nor did I ever exhibit my shells, or 
experiment with my Greek fire to Mr. 
Horace Heffren, at Salem. I never saw 
him until I met him in the cell where I am 
now confined. I never received from Dr. 
Bowles any money, or aid in any way; nor 
did I have any contract with him to fur- 
nish my missiles to him or to the Order of 
Sons of Liberty. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

Dr. Bowles was present when the money 
was given to me, but I do not know who it 
was that furnished it, and never heard any 
one say. I think it was some gentleman 
to whom I showed the shell. I did not 
know the name of any one present, except 
Dr. Bowles and Mr. Stidger. My object in 
going to the Louisville Hotel was to try to 
get help. I knew Dr. Bowles before going 
there, having seen him at his place, he 
keeps a watering place; I went there to 
board at one time when I was sick. When I 
went to Dr. Bowles' place, h« was not there ; 
I waited perhaps an hour; when he cama 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



191 



back, he asked me what my business was, 
and I told him that I had an invention. 
In the conversation it came out that I was 
out of means, and I thought I would board 
there, as it was cheaper than here. He 
said if I would go to Louisville, he would 
meet me there with some friends, and try 
to help me. I staid at his house until after 
dinner, when I left. 

Q. Do you pretend to say that you told 
them you were hard up, and they gave 
you two hundred dollars without mak- 
ing any agreement, or exacting any prom- 
ise? 

A. Yes, sir; they just presented me with 
two hundred dollars. 

From Louisville I think T came here, 
and staid about a week; I then went to 
Detroit, and staid about another week; 
from Detroit I went to Cincinnati; from 
there to Adams county, Ohio; then back to 
Cincinnati, and from Cincinnati here, where 
I have staid until now. 

Q. When was it you were in Windsor, 
Canada? 

A. I think it was in April or May. I was 
there a couple of weeks, but doing nothing, 
I boarded with a Mr. Steele ; I think they 
called him ('olonel Steele, but I do not 
know why. Possibly he was a Colonel in 
the rebel army, though he never told me, 
and I never asked him. There wei-e a 
couple of young men boarding with Colonel 
Steele; one was a nephew of his, the other 
I did not know. One of them, I believe, 
had been in the rebel army. I think 1 went 
from Kentucky to Canada. I knew Colonel 
Steele in Kentucky, when I was Major in 
Metcalf's Cavalry. It was when I was in 
Detroit that T went over to the Canada side, 
and saw Colonel Steele in a billiard saloon. 
I told him how I was situated ; that I 
wanted a partner to go in with me to get 
that shell through ; Mayor Barker, in De- 
troit, became my partner- I slept at Col- 
onel Steele's, and went over to Detroit every 
day. I saw Mr. Vallandigham there two or 
three times, but never spoke to him. 

William H. Chapman, a witness for the 
Government, was then introduced, and, be- 
ing duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, tes- 
tified as follows: 

I reside at Markle, Huntington county, 
Indiana, where I have lived about eight 
years. I am acquainted with Dr. Zumro, 
and know his general reputation for truth 
and veracity, and, from that reputation, I 
certainly should believe him under oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

I am a Union man, and have voted with 
that party for several years. 

William Johnson, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and, being 
auly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
aa follows: 



I reside at Markle, Huntington county, 
Indiana. I am Captain of a home guard 
company ; I belong to the Union party. I 
have been acquainted with Dr. Zumro eight 
or ten years, and know his reputation for 
truth and veracity; that reputation is good, 
and I would believe him under oath. 

cross-examination. 

I have heard some people speak against 
Dr. Zumro, but I believe they have been his 
personal enemies ; and I do not know that 
Dr. Zumro has a larger share of men who 
speak ill of him, than other people who live 
in a town like Markle. There are between 
two and three hundred people in Markle. 

Samuel D. Price, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows: 

I reside in Rockcreek township. Wells 
county, Indiana. I am a carpenter ; at 
present a soldier in the army, which I en- 
tered about three weeks ago. I have known 
Dr. Zumro, intimately, for three or four 
years ; he is our family physician. I know 
his general reputation for truth and vera- 
city; it is good: and I would believe him 
under oath. 

cross-examination. 

Dr. Zumro never made any promises, or 
told me that I should be assigned to easy 
duties, if I testified in this case. I am not 
much acquainted about Markle, nor in 
Huntington county. I never heard any 
one say any thing against Dr. Zumro, but I 
have heard several speak in favor of hini 
before these treason cases came up. Among 
them I have heard Mr. Dresser, Mr. Kitting 
and Mr. Taylor. In politics I am a Repub- 
lican. 

Thurston W. Ritting, a witness for the 
Government, was then introduced, and, 
being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, 
testified as follows: 

1 reside in Rockcreek township. Wells 
county, Indiana, and am a farmer. 1 live 
four or five miles from Markle. I have 
been somewhat acquainted with Dr. Zumro 
about four years. His reputation is gener- 
ally good, and I would believe him under 
oath. 

cross-examination. 

I am a Union man. I have heard several 
people speak of Dr. Zumro, and they have 
said that he was a fine man, and that he 
was thought a good deal of 

BoRziLLAi Messler, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows: 

I reside in Rockcreek township, Wells 
county, and live about two miles from Dr. 
Zumro, whom I have known eight or ten 



192 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



years ; his reputation for truth and veracity 
is good, and I should beUeve him under 
oath. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION. 

1 used to vote the Democratic ticket, but 
I voted for Fremont for President, and have 
voted the Republican ticket since. 

Thomas G. Smith, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment, was then introduced, and, being 
duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, testified 
as follows: 

I reside in Markle, Huntington county, 
Indiana; have lived there since 1860; I 
have known Dr. Zumro since that time. My 
private relations with him have not been 
good. His reputation for truth and veracity 
in the neighborhood where he lives is gene- 
rally good, and I would believe him under 
oath. 

cross-examination. 

I have said, in times past, that Dr. Zumro 
was a scoundrel; that was before this con- 
troversy came up, and it arose out of a per- 
sonal difficulty, which made me feel un- 
kindly toward him at the time. I have heard 
Dr. Zumro spoken against, but I thought 
medical matters caused it. I have heard 
Dr. Zumro censured by some in connection 
with the church which he left; I believe 
the circumstances were these : In Pennsyl- 
vania there is a denomination which has a 
large fund for the education of ministers ; 
Dr. Zumro was one of their students, and 
was educated for the ministry at their ex- 
pense. He afterward changed his course, 
and instead of preaching, practiced medi- 
cine. Politically I am a friend of the Ad- 
ministration; I did not, however, vote for 
Mr. Lincoln the first time he was elected; 
in 1859 I voted with the Democratic party. 

Mrs. Elizabeth T. Simons, a witness for 
the Government, was then introduced, and, 
being duly sworn by the Judge Advocate, 
testified as follows : 

I reside at Lagro, Indiana; formerly I re- 
sided at Huntington, Indiana. My father's 
name is Rev. Richard A. Curran. 

Q. Did you have any difficulty with your 
father about the time of your marriage ? 

Question objected to by the accused, as 
it is incompetent to impeach a witness who 
is caUed as an impeaching witness. Mr. 
Curran having been called to testify to Mr. 
Milligan's good character, and to Dr. Zum- 
ro's bad character. 

If it were permitted to call witnesses to 
impeacli witnesses for character, they might 
call rebutting witnesses, and there would be 
no end to such testimony. A witness whose 
character is impeached, can not call rebut- 
L.ng witnesses to testify to his good charac- 
ter, but that ends it. You might inquire 
whether an impeaching witness has a good 
character, or whether he has not. It is also 
u rule of law, that, on all material matters, a 



witness can not be impeached by calling 
other witnesses as to a matter of fact. 

The Judge Advocate replied: 

The reverend gentleman who testified in 
this Court, was called for the purpose of cer- 
tifying to the moral character of Mr. Milli- 
gan, as well as to his loyalty and law-abid- 
ing disposition. He testified at length upon 
that question. To ascertain from what 
stand-point he testified as to Mr. Milligan's 
character, in those respects, I asked about 
his own sentiments, also as to whether he 
had a difficulty with his daughter on this 
question, and whether he had not laid vio- 
lent hands upon her. 

I asked these questions to ascertain his 
sentiments toward the Government. When 
asked whether he had any difficulty with 
his daughter about her marriage with a 
Union man, and whether he had laid vio- 
lent hands upon her, he flatly denied the 
charges. It is, therefore, perfectly legiti- 
mate to disprove his assertions. I propose 
to ask the character of the man by whom 
the accused undertook to establish his char- 
acter. 

The accused replied: 

I do not remember that the foundation 
for the iiTipeachment was laid by calling the 
attention of the witness to the time and 
place when he made the declarations, or 
committed the act upon which he is to be 
impeached. Unless this was done, the wit- 
ness can not be impeached. I quote from 
Greenleaf On Evidence^ vol. 1, page 602: 

"The credit of a witness may also be im- 
peached by proof that he has made state- 
ments out of Court contrary to what he has testified 
at the trial. But it is only in such matters 
as are relevant to the issue, that the wit- 
ness can be contradicted." 

I may here ask whether it was relevant 
to the issue to know whether the witness 
choked his daughter or not, or did not 
want her to marry a Union man ? 

The author adds : 

"And before this can be done, it is gene- 
rally held necessary, in the case of verbal 
statements, first to ask him as to the time, 
place, and person involved in the supposed 
contradiction. It is not enough to ask him 
the geneial question, whether he has ever 
said so and so, nor whether he has always 
told the same story; because it may fre- 
quently happen, that upon the general 
question, he may not remember whether he 
has so said; whereas, when his attention is 
directed to particular circumstances and 
occasions, he may recollect and explain 
what he has formerly said. This course of 
proceeding is considered indispensable, 
from a sense of justice to the witness; for 
as the direct tendency of the evidence is to 
impeach his veracity, common justice re- 
quires that, by first calling his attention to 
the subject, he should have an opportunity 
to recollect the facts, and, if necessary, to 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



193 



correct the statement already given ; as well 
as by a re-examination to explain the na- 
ture, circumstances, meaning, and design 
of what he is proved elsewhere to have 
said." 

The present case is one where an attempt 
is not only made to contradict the witness 
in regard to verbal statements, but also as 
to facts not relevant to the issue, and the 
rule of law just quoted is against the com- 
petency of the mode of examination pro- 
posed by the Judge Advocate. 

The Judge Advocate replied : 

If the testimony of the witness was not 
relevant to the issue, he should not have 
been put on the stand. It is relevant to 
the issue to find out whether he told the 
truth or not. 

The court room was then cleared for de- 
liberation. 

On being reopened, the Judge Advocate 
announced that the objection had been 
overruled, and the question sustained. 

The witness continued : I had a diiBculty 
with my father at the time of my marriage, 
but he always said that he did not oppose 
my marriage on account of the politics of 
my husband, though my impression has 
been otherwise. I think his words were, 
that he would as soon I would marry a 
negro as an abolitionist. He did use vio- 
lence toward me during that difficulty; 
he laid hands on me, and caught me 
by the throat, and made threats against my 
life. 

Q. Did he choke you? 

Question objected to, and withdrawn. 

He ordered me to leave the house, and 
forbade me to return. He threatened to 
knock my brains out if he met me any- 
where with Mr. Simons. 

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY JOHN R. COFFROTH, ESQ. 

My father drove me from his house in the 
morning, and, by the advice of my mother, 
I went to Dr. Blount's. In the afternoon 
of the same day, he came with Mr. Coftroth 
to the house where I was staying. I re- 
member my father saying to me^ in an tin- 
der tone, that he was perfectly willing that 
I should return home. I had had a con- 
versation with Mr. CofFroth prior to that. 
When I got to Dr. Blount's, I wrote a letter 
to Mr. Simons, stating the difficulty that 
had occurred. From there I went to his 
brother's. It was through Mrs. Blount's in- 
fluence 1 sent for Mr. Cofli'roth. 

Q. What motive did you have in sending 
for me? 

Question objected to by the Judge Advo- 
cate. 

The counsel replied: 

I press the question, because the witness 
was laboring under strong mental excite- 
ment, and to show that her father went 
there with myself, and that the whole mat- 
ter was talked over and reconciled, and 
13 



harmony restored between them. I pro- 
pose, further, to show that she was laboring 
under hallucination, and misunderstood her 
father. There are many reasons why this 
question should be allowed. It is an act of 
simple justice to the accused, and to the 
witness, whose character is called in ques- 
tion, that this course of examination should 
be permitted. 

The Judge Advocate replied : 

The present question is : "What was your 
motive in sending for me ?" It is perfectly 
immaterial to the Court what the motives 
of the witness were; that the counsel can 
investigate privately, if he desires. The 
simple question before the Court is, did 
Mr. Curran tell the truth when he said that 
he had never laid violent hands on his 
daughter, and never drove her from his 
house ? The examination-in-chief was con- 
fined to that, and the cross-examination 
must be confined to the same point. If 
the accused can ask the witness what oc- 
curred after her father drove her from his 
house, he can ask her about every transac- 
tion in her life from that time to this. 

The Court was cleared for deliberation. 
On the Court being reopened, the Judge 
Advocate announced that the objection 
had been sustained. 

Question by the accused: 

You may state whether on the day of 
the difficulty, your father did not visit you, 
and whether you did not become entirely 
reconciled with each other ? 

Objected to by the Judge Advocate, as 
involving the same legal question just 
passed on. Question withdrawn. 

Question by the accused : 

When your father came to see you, at 
that time, you may state, if in the conver- 
sation between yourself and your father, 
in talking over the difficulty, was it not ad- 
mitted by you to him, that the difficulty 
grew out of your calling your father a liar, 
and putting his hand on your shoulder he 
stated to you that you must not speak to 
him in that manner? 

A. I did not state any such thing. 

Q. Were not Mrs. Young, Mrs. Dr. Blount, 
and Mrs. Wm. Blount present at that in- 
terview ? 

A. Mrs. Dr. Blount was present; I am 
not positive about Mrs. Young being 
there. They were in the room when you 
came in, but I think left, except Mrs. Dr. 
Blount. 

Q. Was not Mrs. Dr. Blount present? 

A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is it not true, that this matter of 
choking you was nothing more than the 
fact that your father laid his hand on your 
shoulder? 

A. He did choke me. 

Q. Where did he choke you? 

A. He caught me by the throat, 

Q. Have you not, for the last four or five 



194 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



years, been laboring under strong mental 
excitement, induced by sun-stroke ? 

Question objected to by the Judge Ad- 
vocate. 

Such a question can only be put for one 
purpose: To prove the incompetency of 
the witness to testify. It is too late to 
make that point. It should have been 
made before going into such a cross-exam- 
ination as has been had. 

The counsel for the accused replied: 

The objection of the Judge Advocate is 
not well taken as to the proper time of 
showing the mental condition of the wit- 
ness. I may show that the witness is en- 
tirely incompetent to testify as to that par- 
ticular occurrence, because she was labor- 
ing under such strong mental excitement 
that it rendered her statements entirely 
incredible. AVe may show that the wit- 
ness was laboring under a partial hallucin- 
ation. It may be shown that during this 
excitement, and partial derangement, the 
witness may have conceived ideas not 
founded on fact, and I do not confine my 
question to the particular time of this dif- 
ficulty. It is well known that the witness 
had a sun-stroke several years ago, which 
aflfected her brain, and caused periods of 
strong mental excitement, and that they 
existed before the time of this difficulty, 
at the time, and since then. 

I withdraw the question as to that par- 
ticular time. 

My father has accused me of insanity, 
but I never understood that his reason for 
so thinking, was the cause of his objection 
to my marriage. 

Q. You may state whether, from that time 
to this, your father has not been the same 
kind father you have always known him 
to be? 

Objected to by the Judge Advocate, as 
immaterial. 

The counsel for the accused replied : 

I propose to show that for a long series of 
years, and indeed up to this time, her father 
has been one of the kindest and most in- 
dulgent of parents. I think I can show 
that he did not do what she complained of, 
and that she may be mistaken in her im- 
pressions about this matter. 



The Judge Advocate withdrew the objec- 
tion. 

The witness continued: 

I can not say that my father was kind in 
his treatment of me. He is naturally a 
very passionate man. 

RE-EXAMINATION. 

When I was suffering from this mental 
excitement, I was always prepared for these 
attacks of delirium, by a severe pain in 
my head several hours before the delirium 
set in. Sometimes the attacks would last 
a day and a night. At the time of my 
father's making that attack upon me, I had 
not suffered from any paroxysm of deli- 
rium for more than a year, nor have I 
had any attack since that difficulty occur- 
red, except immediately afterward. Within 
three or four days after this difficulty I 
was taken quite ill, and was delirious for 
twenty-four hours afterward, during which 
I ruptured a blood vessel. Though my 
father is a passionate and excitable man, 
he did not use any violence toward me be- 
fore the difficulty of which i have spoken. 
He used threatening language to me 
in the fall, I think, previous to this diffi- 
culty, which was in the spring of 1863. 
His threat, I think, was that he would 
shoot me, and he made this threat several 
times. I never had any words with my 
father about political matters until the 
morning of my difficulty, and I do not 
recall any other instances of unkindness 
except the threats in connection with 
my contemplated marriage with Mr. Sim- 
ons. 

I never heard my father make use of any 
expressions against the Government. 

The Judge Advocate then announced that 
the accused and the Government having no 
more witnesses to introduce, the testimony 
was closed. 

The counsel for the accused desired the 
Commission to adjourn till Tuesday next, 
to allow time for the preparation of their 
final argument. 

The Commission then adjourned, to meet 
on Tuesday, December 6, 1864, at 10 o'clock, 
A. M. 



N THE 



JURISDICTION OF A MILITARY COMMISSION, 



JONATHAN W. GORDON. 



Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission : 

I appear for Colonel Bowles and Mr. Hum- 
phreys, who have directed me to discuss the 
question of your jurisdiction to try them. 
Before proceeding to this discussion, however, 
I may be pardoned for briefly referring to 
some preliminary considerations. 

I will not deny that I am oppressed with 
the greatness and weight of the labor assigned 
me. Many circumstances conspire to make 
this day's work a burden, while but few 
sources of external encouragement and sup- 
port are to be found. 

I meet at the threshold of the solemn duty 
of this hour, the settled hostility of the Ad- 
ministration, the fierce and relentless spirit 
of the dominant party, and a strong tide of 
prejudice and passion created by a partisan 
press, which, during this trial, has continually 
prejudged the questions to be discussed and 
decided here to-day. Nor, indeed, has this 
uncharitable work been confined to the press. 
Public speakers have caught up the testi- 
mony of witnesses even before their cross-ex- 
amination; and, with such one-sided, partial, 
broken fragments of the whole truth, have 
rushed eagerly into the popular arena, and 
proclaimed the guilt of the accused in every 
part of the State. 

It is impossible that these facts should not 
have met your observation ; and almost as im- 
possible that you should not (although you 
are all unconscious of their influence) be 
more or less afl"ected by them. They can not, 
indeed, have passed unobserved by you who 
have been at liberty, and circulating freely 
among the people; for they have found their 
way even into the lonely cells of the prisoners, 
and made themselves manifest by the dim and 
dismal twilight of their dungeons. They are, 
indeed, every-where. They have polluted the 
atmosphere, and infected the minds of the 
people. They are like the air around and 
within us; and pass unheeded and unthought 
of, while they give color, direction and tone to 
all our thoughts and actions. 

Noi; in regard to one of the accused, has it 
been sufficient for the purposes of those who 
have joined in this hue and cry, to confine 
their assaults upon him to the present time, 
or to the off'enses with which he now stands 
charged. They have gone back to the days of 



other years, and have dragged up and scat- 
tered over the land, old, and stale, and 
groundless imputations of delinquency orig- 
inating in the time of the Mexican War. A 
record, made by interested men, for selfish and 
ambitious purposes, has been referred to, and 
old passions and prejudices invoked, upon a 
point whereon the people of Indiana are justly 
more sensitive than upon any other — the point 
of honor. But even that record does not as- 
sail his courage, his gallantry, or his patriot- 
ism; and, if it did, "he might still proudly ap- 
peal from it to the testimony of his illustrious 
commander, Major General Zachary Taylor, 
under whose eye he fought on the glorious 
field of Buena Vista. To the report of that 
chieftain he appeals against the slanders born 
of subsequent and interested accounts of that 
contest; and prays that they may not be al- 
lowed to give a false and injurious coloring to 
the present accusation, and to the sentence 
which you are now about to pronounce. 

I confess, however, that a still graver source 
of embarrassment to me, in the performance 
of my present duty, springs from the nature 
of the subject to be discussed — the importance 
of the principles to be defended. In view of 
these, the lives and fortunes of the accused — 
and, indeed, of us all — are as nothing. They 
and we are but mortal men. The worst that 
can possibly befall them at your hands, can, 
therefore, but anticipate, by a very few years, 
the common doom which time, or disease, or 
both together, will bring to them and to us all; 
for 

" To every man upon this earth, death cometh soon or 
late." 

It is not, then, merely because the lives and 
fortunes of the accused are suspended upon 
the result of this trial, that I confess myself 
embarrassed — overwhelmed at this moment, 
in the presence of the duty to which it calls 
me. That the lives, and fortunes, and good 
fame of the defendants are all involved in this 
cause, is, indeed, of itself, a fact of suflicient 
importance to touch very nearly any one 
whose heart is not dead to the gentle plead- 
ings of pity and mercy; and weigh heavily 
upon him who in any, even the least degree, 
nmy divide the responsibility of an unfortu- 
nate result to either. I am not insensible to 
the weight of responsibility due, in that re- 
195 



196 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANArOLIS. 



spect, to my relation to their cause. I am 
sure, however, that I should but ill represent 
their sentiments and wishes, if I allowed my- 
self, in this defense of their individual in- 
terests, wholly to lose sight of the conse- 
quences which must follow to the cause of con- 
stitutional liberty in our country, by sub- 
jecting them to a military jurisdiction, to 
which, by the Constitution and laws of the 
land, they are, in my judgment, clearly not 
amenable. The general consequences which 
must flow from such a precedent, give this 
trial an importance far above any private in- 
terests involved in it; and make my sense of 
responsibility painful in the extreme, for fear 
that '■'■the good old cause^' may suffer detriment 
through some default of mine. 

But amid all these sources of discourage- 
ment and embarrassment — and there are 
others which time will not permit me to no- 
tice — I acknowledge with due thankfulness 
that there are not wanting some great encour- 
agements and supports. Among these is the 
fact of publicity. These things are not done 
in a corner, nor under a bushel. They will 
be proclaimed from the house-top; and read 
and known of all men. They will be recon- 
sidered and rejudged long after they shall 
have lost all their importance to us who are 
now engaged in them. What is right in them 
will be retained and appropriated by man- 
kind to aid the great cause of civil liberty, 
and advancing civilization. What is wrong 
will just as certainly be condemned and re- 
jected, as useless or hurtful to the same cause, 
by the same judgment. The record which we 
this day make up and complete, will go to the 
tribunal of history — a tribunal where preju- 
dice can not wound, nor slander kill. To all 
who earnestly strive to follow the path of 
truth and justice this day, the decisions of this 
tribunal can bring neither harm nor shame; 
for truth and justice are its eternal founda- 
tions. 

Nor am I less encouraged and upheld by 
the voice of history. The labor assigned me 
will rest upon facts and precedents, handed 
down to us by the liberty-loving race to which 
we belong. If these shall be regarded as of 
any authority in this forum, then my labors 
shall not be in vain. Success shall crown 
them. The character of the members of this 
Commission, their habitual love of constitu- 
tional liberty, and of order maintained by 
law, do not permit me to doubt that they will 
carefully consider the great question of juris- 
diction; and, indeed, all other questions prop- 
erly before them, and render an honest find- 
ing and sentence according to the Constitu- 
tion and laws of the land. That Constitution 
and those laws are but the organization of the 
facts and precedents transmitted to us with our 
blood, by our British ancestors. They are 
mingled with our very being; and permeate 
all the channels of our social anil political 
life. To abandon thciii, is to give up our social 
and political life — is to die. And, indeed, in 
this time of national sickness, when the pub- 
lic mind is suffering luiiler a melancholy and 
morbid excitement, amounting almost to frenzy, 
it would be madness to give up the sure foun- 



dations of the Constitution and laws, and the 
history and customs of a thousand years upom 
which they rest, for any new-fangled notioa 
born of these evil times. It would be like a 
man, amid the delirium of a fever, abandon- 
ing the business and habits of a whole life- 
time, for a new business and new habits with 
which he had no acquaintance whatever. His^ 
friends would confine him in a straight 
jacket, and send him to a lunatic asylum. 

No, therefore, it must not be. The past is 
the only basis upon which to reconstruct the 
present. — the Constitution, on which it is pos- 
sible to reunite the belligerent members of this- 
once glorious, but now broken Union. But 
we, who are devoted to this great work of re- 
construction, must not exhibit to all the world 
our utter disregard of its plainest provisions, 
and most sacred principles. We must not 
throw down and destroy the fences, which it 
has built about the primordial rights of man- 
kind ; and then expect our enemies, or even; 
our friends to believe us sincere in our profes- 
sions of love for the Constitution, or desire to 
restore the Union; for, by such a course, wa 
shall become scarcely less guilty of treasoa 
to our country, than rebels in arms against it. 
Indeed, the only distinction, in such case,, 
would be that which separates /orce from fraud;: 
and as between two such means to such an 
end, I am sure you will agree with me that 
force is by far the more noble and manly. 
But we stand opposed to both — we who stand 
for our country; and I am comforted to believe 
that you who have each offered your lives for- 
its salvation from the dangers that assail it 
by force, will not hesitate to interpose your 
justice to save it from overthrow which may 
threaten it under the forms of law. 

It is left for others to discuss the questions 
of guilt or innocence arising from the testi- 
mony in its application to the charges. I 
have nothing to do with it. Only so much of 
the evidence as tends to throw light on the 
question of jurisdiction falls to me; and I 
shall refer to the charges and specifications in 
so far only as they may aid in the same gen- 
eral purpose. The argument I am to make 
would be just as valid if the guilt of the ac- 
cused stood admitted, as if their innocence- 
were established by the proof, beyond all 
question. 

There are rights which belong to the guilty 
as well as to the guiltless; and among them 
is that of a fair constitutional and legal trial, 
and all the legitimate consequences thereof 
This right, among the ignorant and unthink- 
ing, is often lost sight of, and sometimes dis- 
regarded. It is, nevertheless, as important as- 
any other. Its denial is, therefore, a crime, 
not only against the individual, but alsa 
against society at large. To destroy a mur- 
derer or a traitor by any other process tlian 
that prescribed by law, is as much murder as 
to kill the best man in the country. Dr. 
Francis Lieber has well presented this subject 
in his treatise on Political Ethics. He says: 

"The State never ceases to protect; even the 
blackest criminal, the moment before his head 
falls, is protected. It was a most fallacious- 
argument th&t,/rustra legis auxilitmi inrocal quk 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



197 



'legem committit, from the lex ialionis, or as St. 
John said before the Lords, when he brought 
in the bill of attainder against the Earl of 
Stafford (April 29, 1641), 'He that would not 
iiave others have a law, why should he have 
any himself?' 'Why should not that be done 
to him, that he himself would have done to 
others?' Even modern writers have endeav- 
ored to derive the punitory power of the 
^tate, from the fact that the offender, by doing 
wrong, declares himself out of the jural soci- 
ety. Nothing can be more untenable in all its 
bearings. On the contrary, the State being 
especially a jural society, can not possibly act 
except by law, and upon jural relations, and 
as far as the right of an individual is the 
■condition of his union with other rational 
individuals, punishment is the right of the 
offender, however paradoxical this may sound 
at first, because we are accustomed to imagine 
under right, some specific privileges. State 
punishment is likewise the protection of the 
•offender, who, without it, would be exposed to 
all, even the most extravagant modes of pri- 
vate redress. No offender would hesitate to 
acknowledge and claim State punishment as 
his right, if the choice were left him, between 
State punishment, which, because it is State 
punishment, requires a formal trial on the one 
hand: and, on the other, those summary pro- 
'Ceedings against criminals caught flagrante 
delicto^ which we find, perhaps, in all early 
•codes, and sometimes acknowledged to a very 
late period {Blackstone, 4, 308), or to which an 
excited people sometimes return, when the 
Tegular trial appears too slow for their in- 
flamed passions, as has been the case in those 
riotous and illegal inflictions of death or other 
punishment, so unfortunately called lynch 
law in our country. I say unfortunately called 
lynch law, for it is ever to be deplored, if any 
illegal procedure receives a regular and sepa- 
rate name of its own. By this very applica- 
tion of a technical term, it assumes an air of 
systematized authority, which has an aston- 
ishing effect upon the multitude, and, in fact, 
aipon most men." Book 2, § 345. 

It is this simple principle that makes it 
murder for any one to kill even a man con- 
demned to death by a competent court, in a 
different manner, or at a different time or 
place, than may have been fixed by the judg- 
ment. The law in this respect makes no dif- 
ference between the lives of the guilty and 
the guiltless. Hence, when men seek to bring 
their enemies to justice and punishment by 
short and easy methods unknown to the law, 
and, therefore, in violation thereof, they but 
dig a pit into which themselves may, at any 
moment, fall and be lost. He who kills even 
•a traitor in violation of law, kills at the same 
time the law itself. 

Whatever may be your opinions, therefore, 
of the guilt or innocence of the accused, it 
•can not effect the question of jurisdiction. 

The next topic to which I desire to call yotir 
uttention, arises from the language of the 
several specifications, and is particularly im- 
portant for the purposes of this discussion, in 
«o far as it may apply to those embraced un- 
der the last charge, namely, "Violation of 



THE Laws of War." It is this; that the alleged 
offenses were committed ''within the military 
lines of the army of the United States, and 
the theater of military operations." 

AVhatever may have been the purpose of the 
Judge Advocate in inserting this clause, it is 
clear to any lawyer that no jurisdiction can 
arise from it, when taken in connection with 
the fact that the accused are citizens of the 
State of Indiana, and of the United States; 
and that Indiana has always sustained a lela- 
tion of loyalty to the Union and its Govern- 
ment. But even if there was no proof of 
citizenship of the accused, it has not been 
proven that the State of Indiana is either 
"within the military lines of the armies of 
the United States," or "the theater of military 
operations." Had the averment been that it 
was within the theater of war, it would have 
been well; for the whole country is the theater 
of war. But that can not be said of the lines 
of the army, or of the theater of military 
operations. There is no definition of "the 
lines of the army " that extends so far as is 
here claimed by the Judge Advocate; and all 
military writers which I have been able to 
examine, define "the theater of operations " 
as follows, contradistinguishing it from the 
theater of war: 

^'The theater of war embraces not only the 
territory of the two belligerent powers, but 
also that of their allies, and of such second- 
ary powers as, through fear or interest, may 
be drawn into the contest." * ® * 

"I'Ae theater of operations^ however, is of a 
more limited character, and should not be con- 
founded with the theater of war. In general, 
it includes only the territory which an army 
seeks, on the one hand, to defend, and on the 
other to invade." HaUeck's Elements of Military 
Art and Science, p. 44; Jomini's Art of War, 74, 7a. 

I conclude, therefore, that "the theater of 
military operations," of a given army, must 
be in front of the base of operations of that 
army. Thus, the base of operations of Gen- 
eral Buell's army, durin| the winter of 1861 
and the succeeding spring, was the Ohio river; 
and his theater of operations, the whole coun- 
try south of that base. And so of other armies. 
The base of our operations has generally been 
some line separating friendly from hostile 
territory; and hence, ''the theater of opera- 
tions," during this war, has generally been 
upon the enemy's soil. The sea-coast, 1 know, 
has frequently, during the present war, be- 
come the base of our operations; but, then, the 
enemy's country was still, in every instance, 
the theater of those operations. It is useless, 
however, to discuss these public and notorious 
facts; for the citizenship of the accused ren- 
ders the attempt to make them responsible for 
a violation of the laws of war, wholly futile. 
Public enemies, only, are subject to the laws 
of war. The citizen, on the other hand, must 
answer for such acts as would, if committed 
by an enemy, be a transgression of the laws 
and usages of war, to his own Government, 
according to its own laws. I will ofi'er a sin- 
gle example, which I quote from the autobi- 
ography of Lieutenant General Scott. It la 
as follows: 



198 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



"In time of war all persons, not citizens of 
or owing allegiance to tlie United States of 
America, who shall be found lurking, as spies, 
in or about fortifications or encampments of 
the armies of the United States, or any of 
them, shall suffer death according to the law 
and usage of nations, by sentence of a gen- 
eral court-martial." 

"'Not citizens;' because, if citizens, and 
found 'lurking,' the crime would be that of 
treason — 'adhering to [our] enemies, giving 
them aid and comfort;' and is so defined by 
the Constitution." Vol. 1, pp. 290, 291. 

But what are "the laws of war? " To whom 
do they apply? The answer to these questions 
must forever put an end to all attempts to in- 
voke the aid of those laws, and of the tribu- 
nals in which they are administered for the 
trial and punishment of one of our own citi- 
zens; for it must be remembered that "the 
laws of war" constitute that branch of inter- 
national law which regulates the intercourse 
and conduct of belligerent persons — public 
enemies — with eacli other. It is this code that 
condemns spies, when taken, to an infamous 
punishment at the hands of their enemy. It 
is for cruel breaches of tliis code, that we are 
sometimes compelled, as a measure of self- 
defense, to resort to the cruel practice of 
retaliation. It is to this code we refer for 
authority to punish guerrillas. And so I might 
go on until I had enumerated all its f)rovi- 
sions; but I should not find one for the pun- 
ishment of one of our own citizens among 
them all, unless it was established that he had 
first joined himself to, and become part of our 
acknowledged public adversaries. These laws 
of war are international — wholly interna- 
tional; and do not apply to the internal regu- 
lation of either one of two or more belligerent 
powers engaged in the same contest. 

If, however, it shall be said that all persons, 
or the great body of them, engaged in the 
present contest, on either side, are citizens of 
the United States; and, therefore, that a diffi- 
culty results in the*application of this public 
code to the parties, and that wliat character 
any citizen may sustain to either, may not 
always be clear, I grant it; but what follows? 
Can we give a man a liostile character before 
he has openly espoused it? Can we strip him 
of the rights of citizenship, before he lias ac- 
quired that relation to the enemy which will 
entitle him to the protection of this code, as 
well as subject him to its penalties, in case he 
violates it? There must be some general rule 
on the subject; and there can be no other or 
better one than to hold all persons resident in 
the States which have seceded and still remain 
out of the Union, && prima facie public enemies; 
and all those who have adhered, and still ad- 
here, to the Constitution and Union, us prima 
facie citizens of, and subject to the laws and 
authority of the United States. 

I know, indeed, that there are at least two 
States which have hitherto stistained an am- 
biguous relation to the struggle. I allude to 
Kentucky and Missouri. They have never 
eeceded by solemn act; and still maintain 
their Constitutional relation to the Federal 
Government. But, then, they are also repre- 



sented in the Confederate Congress and army. 
The character of a citizen of either, must, 
therefore, depend upon his conduct; and he 
must be treated accordingly. If he has not 
joined the public enemy openly, but commits 
a crime against the Government, he is entitled 
to be tried therefor by the ordinary courts of 
the Union, in pursuance of the Constitution 
and laws. If he has joined the public enemy 
and been taken in arms, or '■'■lurking as a spy," 
he is entitled to be treated according to "the 
laws of war:" in the former case to be ex- 
changed as a prisoner of war; in the latter, to 
be hung for violating the laws of war. And 
this is just what our Government has been 
doing during this rebellion. 

The form of these charges places the Gov- 
ernment, then, in the following attitude toward 
the accused, namely: As claiming them as cit- 
izens on the one hand, but denying them the 
rights of citizenship on the other: as fixing 
upon them, for the purposes of this trial, and 
the punishment and infamy that may follow 
it, the character of public enemies, on the one 
hand; but denying them any of the advan- 
tages resulting from that character, on the 
other. Such a course, I submit, is unheard of 
in the judicial proceedings of our country; 
and with all deference to my friend, the Judge 
Advocate, is, in my opinion, wholly inadmis- 
sible. I have little apprehension, therefore, 
that you will claim jurisdiction of the accused 
on the ground that they are guilty of a viola- 
tion of the laws of war; and, by consequence, 
public enemies. If you sustain your juris- 
diction at all, it must, therefore, be upon the 
basis of martial law. 

I beg leave to call your attention to a fact, 
in evidence, which must exercise an important 
intiuence upon your judgment on the ques- 
tion: Whether martial law is, or has been, in 
force in the State of Indiana, or not? and, of 
course, upon that of your jurisdiction. I 
allude, of course, to the fact that the courts, 
both of the State and of the United States, 
within the State of Indiana, have never, at 
any time, during the present rebellion, been 
thereby shut up, and the course of justice 
therein disturbed and stopped; but that those 
tribunals have all along remained open, and 
engaged in the administration of justice; and 
capable of enfoiciiig their judgments, orders, 
and decrees, according to the established laws 
of the land. This fact was not proven in J/r. 
Dodds case. His escape cut oft" all evidence 
in his defense; and, of course, this fact among 
others. Upon this fact, however, and a more 
thorough argument, 1 build my hopes of an 
ultimate decision against the jurisdiction. lu 
pressing the argument and giving utterance 
to these hopes, I beg leave to say for myself, 
and for those whom I represent, that our ob- 
jection to the jurisdiction does not spring 
from any objection to the individual members 
of the Court as fair-minded and honorable 
gentlemen, and worthy to sit in judgment 
upon any man in the land, subject, under the 
Constitution and laws, to their authority. It 
is, on the other hand, simply because as citi- 
zens, in no wise connected with the military 
or naval service of the United States, the 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



199 



accused are not within any military jurisdic- 
tion whatever. They claim the right to be tried 
byoneof the constitutional courtsof theircoun- 
try, and by a jury thereof. They ask justice 
at the hands of their peers of the District of 
the State of Indiana. For justice is properly 
j ustice only when legal, constitutional, and just 
means are employed in the attainment of legal, 
constitutional, and just ends. Your findings 
may correspond precisely with what would be 
those of a jury of the country; but if you 
lack jurisdiction — the right to find at all in 
the premises — it would be a mockery to call 
them, or any subsequent proceedings thereon, 
justice. Justice must have a right origin, or 
it can not exist. If what is called justice 
proceed from a tribunal without authority, it 
is injustice, outrage, crime; and, if it reach 
the life of him who is made its subject, it is 
murder. 3 Co. Inst.., p. 52; I Hale^s His. C. P., 
p. 6, 499-501; 4 Bl. Com., 178; and 4 State 
Trials, p. 129. 

A good citizen will not accept even a favor- 
able judgment at the hands of an unauthor- 
ized tribunal, much less an adverse one; 
because it involves the overthrow of the laws 
and government of his country, on which all 
rights, whether of person or property, depend. 
A good State, alive to a proper sense of its 
duty and dignity, will never allow him to ac- 
cept the one, nor to be made the victim of the 
other. 

Has this Commission, then, jurisdiction of 
this cause ? May it rightfully, lawfully, con- 
stitutionally try the accused upon the charges 
and specifications exhibited against them ? 
If it may, whence does it derive its authority 
for that purpose? 

I am here, to-day, to endeavor to answer 
these questions. You are here, to-day, to 
judge whether I give the true response, or not. 
That you may " the better judge," I ask your 
attention, your candor, and your patience. 

I do not believe that you will hold, as was 
maintained before you on a former occasion, 
that you are precluded from going into the 
question of jurisdiction by the mere order of 
the General convening this Commission, and 
that sending the accused before you "for 
trial." That I may not misrepresent the posi- 
tion taken by the learned Judge Advocate, 
upon this point, I beg leave to quote the entire 
paragraph. It is as follows : 

"When General Hovey convened this Com- 
mission within the limits of his jurisdiction, 
and committed the case of Harrison H. Dodd, 
the accused, to this Commission to try it, by 
virtue of his military power, acting under the 
authority that was given to him by the Com- 
mander-in-chief of the Army, namely, the 
President of the United States, he suspended 
the civil law, and put in operation the military, 
or martiallaw. The officers of this Commission 
could not, under the oath that they have taken, 
refuse to obey the orders of the officers placed 
over them. They could not stop and go back 
of that order, and refuse to hear and determ- 
ine this case." 

Now, whatever may have been your deci- 
sion in that case upon the question of jurisdic- 
tion, I am very certain that you did not adopt 



the doctrine of this paragraph. I know you 
do not, and can not hold to the slavish and 
shameful notion, that you sit here to do what- 
ever the commanding General may order. 
Obedience of the inferior to the superior ia 
for the field, the march, the camp, the desk ; 
and even there it has its limits. The law does 
not require obedience any-where in contraven- 
tion of its own provisions. You are sworn to 
obey the "lawful" commands of your supe- 
riors ; and there your obligation ceases. The 
employment of the word "lawful" [Art. War, 
Sec. 9), clearly excludes the idea of obedience 
to all but such commands. The unlawful 
order of a superior, even the highest, can not 
be given in evidence in justification of a tres- 
pass — much less of a felony. Can obedience, 
then, extend to the duties of the court room, 
and subordinate the justice which, in your 
judicial capacity, your are to administer 
there? If it does, what a mockery is all mili- 
tary justice ! Who would, or could consent to 
sit as a member of a military court, and pass 
judgment upon the lives and fortunes of his 
fellow-men, when his own convictions of the 
law and the facts, in the case, were to have no 
control over his decisions! 

"I had sooner be a dog and bay at the moon." 

Held on such terms, your commissions would 
be but badges of the most odious and wicked 
servitude. Every free mind that has not quite 
escaped the direction of conscience, must 
reject such a position with indignation and 
horror! I think I hear you exclaiming at 
such a proposal : "No; let the General go di- 
rectly to his purposes, and punish whom he 
will, and as he will, without the deceitful and 
wicked pretense of a trial. I will brave all 
consequences sooner than thus surrender my 
manhood. He shall never employ me in a 
mockery so foul, and so cruel!" Every hon- 
orable mind would so feel and so speak ; 
and none, I am sure, more promptly and 
warmly than my distinguished friend, the 
General, who now commands this district; 
and under whose authority you sit. For, if it 
is all a matter of command and obedience, 
then let the command and its execution stand 
together, without the intervention of this hol- 
low form of justice. Do not mock the pre- 
destined victims with the delusive hopes 
arising from the forms of a trial, that, from 
first to last, on this theory, can not rise 
higher than a miserable trick to deceive the 
looker-on ; and divide the responsibility of 
acts not capable of justification, when placed 
before the world in their true light. Indeed, 
on such a theory, you do not constitute a 
court at all, in any received sense of the 
term; for "a court is a place where justice is 
judicially administered." 

With these observations, I shall deliver this 
topic to your consideration and judgment. 

I am thus brought at last to the discussion 
of martial law, as the basis, and, indeed, the 
only basis on which your jurisdiction of the 
present cause can possibly be sustained. If 
martial law does, in fact, exist in the State of 
Indiana, you may have jurisdiction. If it 
does not, you do not, and can not possibly pos- 



200 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



sess such jurisdiction. The question, there- 
fore, recurs upon us: 

Has martial law an actual existence in the 
State of Indiana to-day? If so, how has it 
received such existence? Does it exist by 
proclamation, by law, or by necessity? If by 
proclamation, or law, when was the proclama- 
tion made, or the law passed? If by neces- 
sity, when did that necessity arise; and 
wherein does it consist? 

As the first step toward a satisfactory an- 
swer to these questions, let us determine what 
martial law really is ; for this is still a ques- 
tion. This question I propose to answer from 
the books. Smith says : 

" Martial law is the law of war, that depends 
on the just, but arbitrary power of the King 
or his lieutenant; for, though the King doth 
not make any law but by common consent in 
Parliament, yet in. time of war, by reason of 
the necessity of it, to guard against dangers 
that often arise, he useth absolute power, so 
that his word is law." Smith on the English Re- 
public, book 2, chap. 4. 

Sir Matthew Hale, in his History of the Corn- 
man Latv, says : 

"Martial law is not, in truth and reality, a 
law, but something indulged rather than 
allowed as a law; the necessity of govern- 
ment, order, and discipline in an army is that 
only which gives these laws any countenance." 
1 His. a L., p. 54. 

I make this quotation, not because, in the 
present state of opinion and law, either in 
England or America, it gives us a very pre- 
cise and accurate notion of martial law; but 
in order to bring it into relation to a criticism 
which, when taken in connection with the 
Btate of British military law at the time the 
venerable Hale wrote, is, in my opinion, en- 
tirely unjust; and, to show that, at that time, 
this definition was as accurate and complete 
as covild be given. The criticism to which I 
refer is that of the late Attorney General 
Gushing. He says : 

"This proposition is a mere composite blun- 
der — a total misapprehension of the matter. 
It confounds martial law and military/ law; it 
ascribes to the former the uses of the latter ; 
it erroneously assumes that the government 
of a body of troops is a necessity, more than 
that of a body of civilians, or citizens. It 
confounds and confuses all the relations of 
the subject, and is an apt illustration of the 
incompleteness of the notions of the common- 
law jurists of England in regard to matters 
not comprehended in that limited branch of 
legal science." 8 Opinions of the Ait'ys Gen., 
SC).'), et seq. 

Now, I beg leave to say, that Sir Matthew 
Hale was not a mere common-law lawj^er. His 
writings show him to have been familiar with 
the civil law; and to have read extensively 
the Continental writers on public law. Nor 
is it true that his observations on the nature 
and uses of martial law constitute a mere 
"composite blunder" — "a total misapprehen- 
sion of the question." The "blunder," on the 
contrary, is on the part of the learned At- 
torney General; and not on that of the ven- 
erable Chief Justice. It will be apparent that 



I am right, if we refer to the state of Eng 
land and English military law at the time the 
History of the Common Law was written. Its 
author died in 167G. Up to that time England 
had properly no military cod-e. Her armies 
were really subject to such laws as the King 
might impose, where a limit upon his will, in 
this respect, had not been fixed by Parliament 
It was not until after Hale wrote, and had 
been gathered to his fathers, that the first mil 
itary bill was passed, and military law thereby 
placed upon a different footing from that of 
martial law. The will of the King, until then, 
was the law of the army — a will regulated, 
indeed, by the principles of the civil law ; 
but, even, in that respect, controlled no fur- 
ther than he chose; and this will is the same, 
whether applied to soldiers or civilians. " It 
is not, in truth and reality, a law." It was, 
nevertheless, pretty much all the law known 
to the British army in the time of Hale. 1 
Bl. Com., chap. 13 ; 1 Sullivan's Lectures, p. 257. 
In this view of the facts of history, and the 
state of military law when Hale wrote, the 
learned Attorney General seems to be guilty 
of the blunder which he attributes to the 
Chief Justice. 

The first member of Mr. Stephens' defini- 
tions of martial law is sulficiently accurate. 
He says : 

" Martial law may be defined as the law 
(whatever it may be), which is imposed by 
military power." 2 Com. Laws of England, 
p. 561. 

The Duke of Wellington was also right 
when he defined it thus: 

'■'-Martial law is neither more nor less than 
the will of the General who commands the 
army." Hansard's Debates, (3d series), vol. 
115, p. 880. 

And again when he wrote as follows : 

"Military law" [i. e., martial Zaw], "as ap- 
plied to any persons excepting officers, sol- 
diers, and followers of the army, for whose 
government there are particular provisions 
of law, in all well regulated countries, is 
neither more nor less than the will of the Gen- 
eral of the army." Dispatches, vol. 6, p. 43. 

The distinction between martial and military 
law is, in this last definition, made plain, the 
latter being confined to provisions of law for 
the regulation of the army; and the former to 
such as the will of the General may impose 
upon those— .-not soldiers — under 7narlial law. 

Earl Grey, in discussing the questions 
growing out of a declaration of martial law 
in Ceylon, again expresses the idea with suf- 
ficient accuracy. He says: 

"What is called proclaiming martial law, is 
no law at all; but merely for the sake of public 
safety, in circumstances of great emergency, 
setting aside all law and acting tinder military 
power; a proceeding which requires to be fol- 
lowed up by an act of indemnity when the 
disturbances are at an end." Hough's Prec. in 
Mil. Law, p. 515. 

Judge-Advocate-General Dundas, in writing 
upon the subject, says: 

'^Martial law is not a written law; it arises 
on a necessity to be judged of by the Execu- 
tive, and ceases the instant it can possibly be 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



201 



allowed to cease. MUitary law has to do only 
with the land forces of the Crown, mentioned 
in the second section of the Mutiny Act. Mar- 
tial law comprises all persons, all are tinder it, 
whether they be civil or military." Second Rep. 
on Ceylon, Hough, supra, p. 535. 

"When martial law is proclaimed," says 
Hough, " courts-martial are thereby vested 
with such a summary proceeding, that neither 
time, place nor persons are considered. Ne- 
cessity is the only rule of conduct; nor are 
the punishments which courts-martial may 
inflict under such authority limited to" such 
as are prescribed by law. Hough on Courts- 
Martial, p. 383. 

Captain Benet, in his treatise on Military Laio 
vnd Courts-Martial, in speaking of martial law, 
«ays: 

" 3Iartial law, then, is that military rule and 
authority which exists in time of war, and is 
conferred by the laws of war, in relation to 
persons and things, under and tvithin the scope 
of active military operations in carrying on the 
war, and which extinguishes or suspends civil rights, 
and the remedies founded upon them for the time 
being, so far as it may appear to be necessary, 
in order to the full accomplishment of the pur- 
pose of the war, the party exercising it being 
liable in an action for any abuse of the au- 
thority thus conferred. It is the application 
of military government — the government of 
force — to persons and property within the 
scope of it, according to the laws and usages 
of war, to the exclusion of municipal govern- 
ment, in all respects where the latter would 
impair the efficiency of military law, or mili- 
tary action." Benet on Mil. Law and Courts- 
Martial, p. 14. 

The late Commander-in-chief of the Army 
of the United States, Major General Halleck, 
observes : 

"We remark, in conclusion, that the right 
to declare, apply and exercise martial laiv, is 
one of the rights of sovereignty, and is as es- 
sential to the existence of a State, as is the 
right to declare or carry on war. It is one 
of the incidents of war, and, like the power 
to take human life in battle, results directly 
and immediately from the fact that war le- 
gally exists. It is a power inherent in every 
government, and must be regarded and recog- 
nized by all other governments, but the ques- 
tion of the authority of any particular func- 
tionary to exercise this power, is a matter to 
be determined by local, and not by interna- 
tional law. Like a declaration of siege, or 
blockade, the power of the officer who makes 
it, is to be presumed until disavowed; and 
neutrals who attempt, in derogation of that 
authority, do so at their peril." International 
Laio and Laws of War, p. 380. 

Again, he says : 

"The English common law authorities gen- 
erally confound martialyiiih military XAVf ; and, 
consequently, throw very little light upon the 
subject, considered as a domestic fact; and in 
parliamentary debates it has usually been 
discussed as a fact, rather than as forming 
any part of their system of jurisprudence. 
Nevertheless, there are numerous instances 
in which martial law has been declared and 



enforced, in time of rebellion or insurrection, 
not only in India, and British Colonial Pos- 
sessions, but also in England and Ireland. It 
seems that no act of Parliament is required 
to precede such declaration, although it ia 
usually followed by an act of indemnity, 
when the disturbances which called it forth 
are at an end, in order to give constitutional exist- 
ence to the fact of martial law." Id., 374. 

I desire to remark, in passing, that a care- 
ful study of the English authorities alluded 
to, will, perhaps, explain them, and show that 
their confusion is only apparent, in relation 
to this subject. In the first place, as already 
shown, the English had no distinct system of 
military law until after the revolution of 1688; 
and before that time, their armies were sub- 
ject, in a great degree, to simple martial law. 
It is true, the King's will was, in some meas- 
ure, restrained by statute. In the second, as 
the only ground upon which that will — martial 
law — can apply to others than soldiers within 
the kingdom, is that of necessity, it was both 
natural and philosophical for them to regard it 
as simply a fact. Indeed, it is nothing else 
but a fact both in its origin and its applica- 
tion. It originates in necessity, which is a 
fact. It is the will of the commanding gen- 
eral, who always determines its extent and the 
mode of its application. It will thus assume 
a different form — will be more or less sweep- 
ing — cruel or merciful, according to the exi- 
gency of each particular instance of its exer- 
cise, as well as the character and temper of 
him who administers it. A thing thus vari- 
ant and uncertain can not be allowed as a 
law; for a law must be a rule prescribed, 
must be uniform in its application, which can 
never be said of any thing resulting from 
mere necessity, and subject for its measure 
and duration to mere human will. The only 
element common to such a state of administra- 
tion and law, is that both are applied to the 
affairs of men. It will, therefore, be subject, 
of course, to the judgment of public opinion 
as all other facts are, in which moral agents 
and relations are involved; but whatever re- 
straint that imposes, can not change the fact 
into a law. Nor, it would seem, does the right 
of a belligerent depend upon the legality of 
the war, as remarked by General Halleck. On 
the contrary, we might naturally suppose that 
he who entered upon an illegal and unjust 
war, would be most likely to avail himself 
first of the advantages of martial law, which, 
in the language of Mr. Adams, would "sweep 
the laws of his adversary by the board," and 
substitute his discretion therefor. Hence, up- 
on the whole, I see no reason why the learned 
general should criticise the English. The 
last two authors cited, seemingly without per- 
ceiving it, confine the operation of martial law 
to the territory of public enemies, or to the 
immediate theater of military operations. In 
either view, their remarks are inapplicable to 
our condition here; for we may admit the 
most unbounded authority to exercise martial 
law in our generals, in carrying on a foreign 
war in an enemy's country; or in a domestic 
war '■'■within the scope of active military operations," 
and it will not follow that any such authority 



202 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



can exist in a State devoted to the Govern- 
ment, and in no sense the theater of "active 
military operations." In the foreign country, 
the citizen will be subject to international 
law; and our public enemy can not look be- 
yond that to see whether, in the exercise of 
martial law, we disregard our own Constitution. 
At home, the fact of war and the immediate 
presence of hostile armies puts an end to all 
other laws; and martial laiv, for the time be- 
ing, exists by necessity. Military power is 
rather, in such case, a law to itself. They 
leave us, therefore, in quite as much doubt 
and confusion, so far as the case in hand is 
concerned, as they found us. 

I beg your pardon for introducing here, a 
little out of place, the observations upon 
martial law of some of our own leading politi- 
cians. I say politicians advisedly ; for I do 
not think that they were generally actuated in 
the utterance of these opinions by the motives 
that should govern statesmen ; and I do not 
think 80, because the whole spirit of the de- 
bates in which they were delivered, was of a 
most decided and even bitter partisan tone. 
I allude to the debates on remitting the fine 
imposed by Judge Hall upon General Jack- 
eon, at New Orleans, in 1815, for contempt of 
court in refusing obedience to a writ of habeas 
corpus. Democrats in Congress were in favor 
of the measure; while most, if not all the 
Whigs, were opposed to it. Mr. John Q. 
Adams, then in the House of Representatives, 
made it an occasion for striking at both the 
Democratic party and slavery. He maintained 
that the measure was a hobby, on which lead- 
ing Democrats were seeking to elevate them- 
selves to the Presidency upon General Jack- 
son's popularity; and then turned upon the 
slaveholders of the South, and reminded them 
how easy it would be, in some fit emergen- 
cy, to employ martial law for the abolition 
of slavery. And such generally was the 
spirit of the debate; a spirit, one would think, 
little calculated to render opinions remarka- 
ble for their legal accuracy. It was in this 
debate that Mr. Adams said: 

"The power of Congress" — the power to de- 
clare martial law — " has, perhaps, never been 
called into exercise under the present Consti- 
tution. But when the laws of war are in 
force, what, I ask, is one of those laws? It is 
this : that when a country is invaded, and tivo hos- 
tile armies are met in martial array, the com- 
manders of both armies have power to eman- 
cipate all the slaves in the invaded territory. 

"And here I recur again to the example of 
General Jackson. What ar0 you about in 
Congress? You are about passing a law to re- 
fund to Goneral Jackson, the amount of a cer- 
tain fine imposed ujjon him by a judge under the 
laws of Louisiana. You are going to refund him 
the money with interest, and this you are going 
to do, because the imposition of the fine was un- 
jast. And why was it unjust? Because 
General Jackson was acting under the laws 
of war; and because the moment you place a 
military commander in a district' that is the 
tlicater of war, the laws of war apply to that 
place. 

"I might furnish a thousand proofs to show 



that the pretensions of the gentlemen to the 
sanctity of their municipal institutions, un- 
der a state of actual invasion, and actual 
war, whether sei^ile, civil, or foreign, is 
wholly unfounded, and that the laws of war 
do, in all such cases, take pr-ecedence. I lay 
this down as the law of nations. I say, the 
military authority takes, for the time, the 
place of all municipal institutions, and of 
slavery among the rest; and that, under that 
state of things, so far from its being true, that 
the States where slavery exists have the ex- 
clusive management of the subject, not only 
the President of the United States, but the 
commander of the army, has power to order 
the universal emancipation of the slaves. I 
have given here more in detail a principle 
which I have asserted on this floor before 
now; and of which I have no more doubt 
than that you, sir, occupy that chair." 

In the course of the same debates, Mr. Bu- 
chanan, taking it for granted that General 
Jackson had done no more than his duty in 
declaring martial law in New Orleans, in 1814 
and 1815, said: 

"If General Jackson did no more than his 
duty in declaring martial laio, the moment that 
declaration was made, the oflBcial functions of 
Judge Hall ceased, with regard to his power 
of issuing writs of habeas corpus, which might 
interfere with the defense of the city. As 
soon as martial law was in force, every citizen 
of New Orleans, whether sustaining an official 
character or not, was bound to submit to it. 
* « « Pqj. [^ yf^g quite a plain case, that, 
if martial law did not supersede and put in 
abeyance the civil power, it would be wholly 
insufficient in attaining the only objects for 
which alone it could be tolerated or justified." 

Mr. Douglas, in the House of Representa- 
tives, maintained the same principles; bu», 
from his statement of the case, confined their 
operation to the defense of the citj'; in other 
words, to a state of siege. Among other things, 
he said: 

"I maintain that, in the exercise of the power 
of proclaiming martial law. General Jackson did 
not violate the Constitution, nor assume to him- 
self any authority not fully authorized and 
legalized by his position, his duty and the ne- 
cessity of the case. General Jackson was the 
agent of the Government, legally and constitu- 
tionally authorized to defend the city of New 
Orleans. It was his duty to do this at all hazards. 
It was then conceded, and is now conceded, that 
nothing but martial law would enable him to 
perform that duty. His power was commen- 
surate with his duty, and he was authorized 
to use the means essential to its performance. 
This principle has been recognized and acted 
tipon by all civilized nations, and is familiar 
to all who are conversant with military his- 
tory. It does not imply the right to suspend the 
laws and civil tribunals at pleasure. The right 
grows out of the necessity. The principle is that 
tlic commanding General may go as far, and 
no further than is absolutely necessary to the 
defense of the place committed to his protec- 
tion. There are exigences in the history of 
nations, when necessity becomes the para- 
mount law, to which all other considerations 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



20S 



must yield. If it becomes necessary to blow 
up a fort, it is I'ight to do it. If it is necessary 
to sink a ship, it is right to sink it. If it is 
necessary to burn a city, it is right to burn 
it." Life and Speeches of Senator Douglas, pp. 
25, 26. 

And so I might go on, adding opinions and 
definitions of martial law to endless extent. I 
will quote but one more; and that is the 
opinion of Attorney General Gushing, already 
referred to. He says: 

^'^Martial law, as exercised in any country by 
the commander of a foreign army, is an ele- 
ment of the jus belli. It is incidental to a state 
of solemn war, and appertains to the law of" 
nations. The commander of the invading, 
occupying, or conquering army, rules the in- 
vaded, occupied, or conquered foreign country, 
with supreme power, limited only by interna- 
tional law, and the orders of the sovereign or 
government he serves or represents. For by 
the law of nations, the occupatio bellica, in a 
just war, transfers the sovereign power of the 
enemy's country to the conqueror." Wolff's 
Jus Gentium, § 255; Grotius De Jure et Pads, ed. 
Cocceii, lib. iii, cap. 8. 

Such occupation by right of war is, so long 
as it is military only, that is, flagrante hello, will 
be the case put by the Duke of Wellington, of 
all the powers of the government resumed in 
the hands of the commander-in-chief. If any 
local authority continue to exist, it will be 
with his permission only, and witla the power 
to do nothing, except what in his plenary dis- 
cretion, or his own sovereign, through him, 
shall see fit to authorize. The law of the 
land will have ceased to possess any proper 
vigor. 

Thus, while the armies of the United States 
occupied different provinces of the Mexican 
Republic, the respective commanders were not 
limited in authority by any local law. They 
allowed, or rather required, the magistrates 
of the country, municipal or judicial, to con- 
tinue to administer the laws of the country 
among their own counirymeu, but in subjec- 
tion always to the military power, which acted 
summarily and according to discretion, when 
the belligerent interests of the conqueror re- 
quired it, and which exercised jurisdiction, 
either summarily or by means of military 
commissions, /or the protection or punishment of 
citizens of the United States in Mexico. 

That, it would seem, was one of the forms 
of martial laiu. A violent state of things, to 
cease, of course, when hostilities should cease, 
and military occupation be changed into polit- 
ical occupation. Elphinstone v. Bedruchund, 1 
Knapp's Rep., p. 338; Cross v. Harrison, 16 Uow., 
p. 164. 

If we now return, and endeavor to glean from 
all these authorities and opinions an idea of 
martial law, as applicable to the internal affairs 
of a State, we shall find ourselves scarcely 
nearer to it than we were at the stai-t. The 
laws of war regulate a state of war, and define 
the rights of parties to it, with respect to each 
other; and can only afford, therefore, a remote 
analogy for our guidance in the internal con- 
cerns of a State in which riots or rebellions 
call into requisition the military power. True, 



when a civil war assumes the magnitude of 
our present contest, and the parties thereto — 
rebels on the one side and Government on the 
other — from the necessity of the case, as well 
as from considerations of humanity, are com- 
pelled to adopt the public law of war, and to 
regulate their conduct according to its princi- 
ples, the laws of war become, to that extent, 
a sufficient guide. But all this does not, in 
the least, help us, in regard to those States 
which have never been engaged against the 
Government. Whether any, and if any, what 
assertion of military power, incompatible with 
civil institutions and civil rights, is admissi- 
ble in those States, does not appear from the 
books that treat of martial law. Earl Grey 
seems to approach the point more nearly than 
the rest; for in such case martial law would 
"ire truth and fact be no law at all; but the setting 
aside of all law and acting under military power. 
Supra. And this, he says, can only be done 
"in circumstances of great emergency," and 
must be followed "by an act of indemnity." 
It is, therefore, the substitution of military 
force for, and to the exclusion of, the laws; 
and can be justified no further than is abso- 
lutely necessary. And all the authorities 
and opinions cited go to this extent, and no 
further. 

Has this substitution, then, of military power 
for civil law, and civil tribunals and institu- 
tions, taken place in Indiana? And if so, 
upon what necessity? When was it done? 
Who determined the necessity, and made the 
substitution? Where is the act of Congress, 
the proclamation of the President, or the order 
of the military commander of the department, 
or the district? Have these, or has any of 
them, acted upon this subject; and, if so, to 
what extent? And above, and before all, 
where is the grant of authority to any, or all 
of them combined, or, indeed, to the whole 
Government, thus to "set aside all law," and 
substitute "military power" therefor? To 
assume that any such authority can exist in a 
limited government, is a self-contradiction. 

Let us examine, briefly, the nature of the 
Anglican system of civil liberty — institutional 
government — a system which, in a very large 
measure, we have inherited or adopted; and 
see whether such a system as martial law is at 
all compatible therewith. Can the two exist 
together? 

I shall endeavor to answer this question by 
a brief review of English history and law; 
for if this power "to set aside all law," and 
to "act under military power," be at all con- 
sistent with such a system of law and govern- 
ment, we shall thus be able to determine in 
what emergencies and to what extent. 

I enter the more cheerfully upon this re- 
view, because it will enable me to correct my 
friend, the Judge Advocate, in an assertion 
which he has frequently made during tho 
progress of these trials, namely: '■'■We art 
making new precedents daily." Now. I think, I 
shall be able to show him that we are follow- 
ing old and bad precedents — the work of 
wicked and lawless princes in evil times — 
which were condemned, disallowed, and re- 
versed by better princes immediately upon 



204 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



the return of better times; and which are 
only not known to him, because they have so 
long remained dead and buried among the 
rubbish of barbarous ages, that he has not 
been able, or, at least, has not chosen to dig 
them up for his own and your guidance on 
this occasion. I shall aid him in this respect; 
and, while I do so, must beg his pardon, and 
that of the Government he represents, for dis- 
pelling the illusion that either is entitled to 
patent a new precedent. In this regard they 
■will find, after all, and, indeed, they should 
.have known from the first, that the further 
back they go in the history of the past, the more 
precedents they will find for the easy but 
ruinous substitution of force for law. Wher- 
ever a free people have lost their liberties, 
there will be found a precedent in point. The 
history of Greece and Rome is fruitful of such 
precedents. Solomon had wiser conceptions 
of the methods by which history continually 
repeats itself, than to speak of new prece- 
dents; and the sum of wisdom on this point, 
as in his day, still remains happily expressed 
in these words: "There is no new thing un- 
der the sun." 

I will not go back in the history of English 
law beyond Magna Charta; for that "solemn 
instrument" has been justly regarded as lay- 
ing the imperishable foundations of the great 
political institutions of that country. Creasy 
on Ihe English Constitution, 3. Ours, in America, 
rest on the same foundations — are referable to 
the same origin. 

The 2yth chapter of that instrument, as given 
by Henry III, contains these provisions, which 
have found a place in all our American Con- 
stitutions: 

'■^NuUus liber homo capiatur, vel imprisonetur. 
■aut disseisielur de l.ibero tenemento suo, vel liberta- 
tibus, vel liberis consuetudinibus suis, aut utlagatur, 
<iut exuletur, aut aliquo modo distruatur^ nee super 
cum ibimus, nee super eurn mittimus, nisi per legale 
judicium parium suorum, vel per legem terra;." 2 
Coke's Inst., p. 45. Which has been rendered 
as follows: 

"No freeman shall be taken, or imprisoned, 
or disseized, or outlawed, or exiled or ban- 
ished, or in any ways destroyed; nor will we 
pass upon him, nor will we send upon him, 
unless by the lawful judgment of his peers, 
or by the law of the land." Creasy, supra, 
p. 134. 

"These are," as Mr. Creasy observes, "all 
words that should be carefully read over, and 
over, and again; for, as Lord Coke quaintly 
observes, in his comments on them, 'as the 
gold-finer will not, out of the dust, threds, or 
shreds of gold, let passe the least crum,' in 
respect of the excellency of the metal; so 
ought not the learned reader to passe any 
sylbvble of this law, in respect of tlie excel- 
lency of the matter.' " Id., 135; and 2 Inst., 57. 

Lord Coke in commenting upon the words: 
" No man destroyed,'' etc., gives the follo%ving 
commentary and illustration: 

"That is, forejudged of life, or limb, dis- 
herited, or put to torture or death." » « » 

"Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, was destroyed, 
that is, adjudged to die as a traitor, and put 
to death, in 14 E. 2, and a record thereof 



made; and Henry, Earl of Lancaster, hia 
brother and heir, was restored for two prin- 
cipal errors against the same Thomas, Earl : 1. 
Quod 7ion fuit araniaius, et ad responsionem posi- 
ius tempore pacis, eo quod cancellaria et alice curice 
Regis fuer, apertce. in quibus lex Jiebat unicuique 
prout fieri consuevit : that is to say: Because 
he was not arraigned, and because in time 
of peace, he was put to trial while the 
Chancery and other courts of the King were 
open, in each of which the law was regularly 
administered: 2. Quod contra curiam de liber- 
tatibus, cum dictus Thomas fuit unus parium et 
magnatum regni, in qua continetur — and reciteth 
this chapter of Magna Charta, and specially 
quod Dominus Lex non super eum ibit ; nee mittet ; 
nisi per legale judicium parium stiorum, contra 
legem, et contra tenorum Magna Charta; that is, 
because it was against the charter of liber- 
ties, since the said Thomas was one of the 
peers and magnates of the realm in which it is 
preserved ; and reciteth this chapter of Magna 
Charta, and specially 'because the Lord the 
King will not proceed against anyone, nor send 
upon him, unless by the legal judgment of his 
peers. Nevertheless, by the aforesaid proceed- 
ing, in time of peace, without arraignment, 
or pleading, or the legal judgment of his 
peers, against law, and the terms of Magna 
Charta, he was put to death. More examples 
of this kind might be found." Id., supra. 

This case, when the mode of trial is shown, 
is the reversal of a precedent which the Judge 
Advocate would, perhaps, style " a new pre- 
cedent ; " for the historian tells us that Thomas 
of Lancaster was adjudged to death by a kind 
of military court, extemporized by the King, 
and consisting of himself and a few Ear^s and 
Barons. 2 Lingard His. Eng., p. 248, and note; 
2 Hume His. of Eng., pp. 159, 160. 

The learned Coke adds, immediately after 
citing this case, and its reversal: 

" Every oppression against law, by color of 
any usurped authority, is a kind of destruc- 
tion; for Quando aliquid prohibitnr, jirohibiter e( 
omne, per quod devenitur ad illud; and it is the 
most grievous oppression that is done by color 
of justice." Id., sup. 

The reversal of a second precedent that 
might be regarded as new, is recited by Sir 
Matthew Hale in his History of the Common 
Law; and is thus given: 

"The exercise of martial law, whereby any 
person should lose his life, or member, or lib- 
erty, may not be permitted in time of peace, 
when the King's Courts are open for all per- 
sons to receive justice according to the laws 
of the land. This is, in substance, declared 
by the Petition of Eight, 3 Car. I, whereby such 
commissions and martial law were repealed and 
declared contrary to law. And accordingly 
was that famous case of Edmund, Earl of 
Kent, wlio being taken at Pomfret, 15 Ediv. 2, 
the King and divers lords proceeded to give 
sentence of death against him, as in a kind 
of military court, by a summary proceeding, 
which judgment was afterward, in 1 Edw. 3, 
reversed in Parliament. And the reason of 
that reversal serving to the purpose in hand, 
I shall here insert it as entered in the record, 
viz.: ^ Quod cum quicunq ; homo ligeus domini 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



205 



rcrjis pro seiiitionibus, etc., icmpore pads capitis et 
in giiacungue curia domini regis ductus fuerit de 
tJKsmodi seditionibus et aliis feloniis sibi impositis 
pir legem et consuetudine rcgni arrectari debet et 
responsionem adduci, et inde per communem legem 
antequam fuerit morti adjudicand' (triari) etc. 
Unde cum notorium sit et manifestum quod totum 
ttmpus quo impositum fuit eidcm comiti propter 
mala et /acinora fecisse, ad tempus in quo captus 
fuit et in quo morti adjudicatus fuit, fuit tempus 
pads maximce, cum per totum tempus prcedictum et 
cancellaria et alice plac. curice domini regis apertce 
fuer. in quibus cuilibet lex fiebatur sicut fieri con- 
iruevit, nee idem dominis rex unquam tempore illo 
cum vexillis explicatis equitabai, etc^ Which 
record may be rendered thus: 

" Whenever the subject of the Lord the King, 
shall be arrested for sedition in time of peace, 
before he can be adjudged to death, according 
to the common law, he must be taken into 
some court of the King, and held to answer 
for such seditions and other felonies; whence 
it follows, that when it is made known and 
manifest, that all the time during which it is 
alleged that the crimes were done, on account 
of which he was arrested, to the time in which 
he was taken and adjudged to death, was a 
time of profound peace, and during all the 
time aforesaid, the Chancery and other courts 
of the King were open, in which any law 
could be executed, as it was the custom to have 
done, the same Lord the King had no power, 
during that time, to exercise military control. 

"And, accordingly, the judgment was re- 
versed ; for martial law, which is rather in- 
dulged than allowed, and that only in case of 
necessity, in time of open war, is not permitted 
in time of peace when the ordinary courts of justice 
are open J' 1 His. C. L., pp. 55, 56. 

In order that these precedents may have 
their due weight in this case, I beg leave to 
give a legal definition of what is, in this 
respect, held to be a time of peace in England, 
according to the common law. I will quote 
the precise language of Lord Coke, who says: 

" When the courts of Justice are open, and the 
judges and ministers of the same may by 
law protect men from oppression and vio- 
lence, and distribute justice to all, it is said 
to be a time of peace. So, when by invasion, in- 
surrection, or rebellion, etc., the peaceable 
course of justice is stopped, so as the courts of jus- 
tice be as it were shut up, then it is said to be 
time of war." Coke upon Littleton, 249, b. n. 1. 

In further commenting upon the great chap- 
ter of Magna Charta, already quoted. Lord 
Coke says: 

"'By the judgment of his peers' are to be 
understood of the King's suit'' — in other 
words, of a State prosecution. "And it ex- 
tendeth to the King's suit in case of treason 
or felony, or misprision of treason or felony, 
or being accessory to a felony before or after, 
and not to any other inferior olfense. Also, 
it extendeth to the trial where he is to be con- 
victed." 2 Inst., 49. 

And upon the word ^'legale," he says: 

" By the word legale, amongst others, three 
things are implied: 1st. That the manner of 
trial was by law before this statute. 2d. That 
their verdict must be legally given, wherein 



principally it is to be observed, 1st. That the 
lords ought to hear no evidence but in the 
presence and hearing of the prisoner; 2d. 
After the lords have gone together to consider 
of the evidence, they can not send to the High 
Steward to ask the judges any question of 
law, but in the hearing of the prisoner, etc.; 
3d. When all the evidence is given, etc., the 
High Steward can not collect the evidence 
against the prisoner, or in any. sort confer 
with the lords, touching their evidence, in the 
absence of the prisoner," etc. 2 Inst., 49. 

And again, upon the word, "by the law of 
the land," while, perhaps, going to the extent 
of permitting a party suspected of treason to 
be arrested without writ, upon suspicion and 
common fame, he totally excludes the notion 
of his continued imprisonment without some 
warrant; and leaves out of the question all 
other forms of trial, but that by the legal 
judgment of his peers. Id., pp. 50, 55. 

After the close of the long and glorious 
reign of Edward the Third, his unworthy 
grandson, Richard the Second, came to the 
throne, which he finally lost, by attempting to 
return to such precedents as those just cited 
of his great grandfather. His efforts to get 
rid of Magna Charta and the Common Law, 
and to substitute the Roman Civil Law for 
them, may be learned from the records of his 
reign. An outline sufficient for our purpose 
will be found in Sulliva7i's Lectures on the Laws 
and Constitution of England. (See vol. 1, p. 318, 
et seq.; and vol. 2, 257.) In the former place 
will be seen what great efforts he made to in- 
troduce the Civil Law, and in the latter, that 
this law became the law of the Marshal's 
Court; no doubt on account of the fondness 
of the kings therefor, and, also, that the ju- 
risdiction of that court embraced the admin- 
istration of martial law over soldiers and camp 
followers. 

In subsequent reigns, the kings of England 
struggled almost constantly to extend this 
jurisdiction to others than soldiers; but it 
was a struggle against the free spirit of the 
nation. In the reign of Henry the Eighth, an 
instrument was placed in the hands of that 
monarch, by the Parliament, which seemed to 
go far toward making the king absolute; and 
which was subsequently used by him and his 
successors in such a way as almost to insure 
that end. This was done by the passage of a 
statute " which," as Lord Coke observes, " gives 
more power to the king than he had before;" 
and yet even there it is declared that he can 
not "alter the law, statutes or customs of the 
realm, or impeach any in his inheritance, 
goods, body, life, etc." The father of that 
King had gone so far, prior to this act, as to 
claim the right to control the subject's right 
of doing all things not unlawful (Hallarn's 
Constitutional History, \). 15); and his daughter. 
Queen Elizabeth, carried the power under this 
act to such an extent as to set all law at defi- 
ance. " One Peter Burchill, a fanatical Puri- 
tan, and, perhaps, insane, conceiving that Sir 
Christopher Hatton was an enemy to the true 
religion, determined to assassinate him; but 
by mistake, he wounded instead a famous sea- 
man, Captain Hawkins. For this ordinary 



206 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



crime, the Queen could hardly be prevented 
from directing him to be tried instantly by 
martial law. Her council, however, (and this 
it is important to observe), resisted this ille- 
gal proposition with spirit and success." 
{Hallam Cons. His., 143.) "The Queen had been 
told, it seems, of what had been done in 
Wyatt's business — a case not at all parallel; 
though there was no sufficient necessity, even 
in that instance, to justify the proceeding by 
martial law. But bad precedents always be- 
get progenium vitiosiorem." {Id., in note). 
But the same learned authority gives the 
following instances of the exercise by Queen 
Elizabeth of a power almost absolute, through 
proclamations. I quote: 

"We have, indeed, a proclamation some 
years afterward, declaring that such as 
brought into the kingdom, dispersed papal 
bulls, or traitorous libels against the Queen, 
should, with all severity, be proceeded against 
by Her Majesty's lieutenants, or their depu- 
ties, by martial law, and suffer such pains and 
penalties as they should inflict; and that none 
•of her said lieutenants, or their deputies, be 
in any wise impeached in body, lands, or 
goods, at any time hereafter, for any thing to 
be done or executed in the punishment of any 
uuch oflFender, according to the said martial law 
and the tenor of this proclamation, any law 
or statute to the contrary, notwithstanding." 
This Mr. Hallam regards as "by no means con- 
stitutional; " but apologises for it, because it 
was done "when, within a few days, the vast 
armament of Spain " — known in history as 
the Spanish Armada — "might effect a landing 
on the coast." "But," he remarks further, 
"it is an unhappy consequence of all devia- 
tions from the even course of law, that the 
forced acts of overruling necessity come to be 
distorted into precedents, to serve the pur- 
poses of arbitrary power." Id., 143; Hume's 
His. Eng., p. 844. 

I quote the same author for the following 
instance of a still greater stretch of this ar- 
bitrary and unconstitutional power, which oc- 
curred during the same reign: 

"No measure of Elizabeth's reign can be 
compared, in point of illegality, to a commis- 
sion in July, 1595, directed to Sir Thomas 
Wilford, whereby, upon no other allegation 
than that there had been of late sundry great 
unlawful assemblies of a riotous sort, both in 
the city of London and the suburbs, for the 
suppression whereof (for the inaolency of 
many desperate offenders is such that they 
care not for any ordinary punishment) it was 
found necessary to have some such notable re- 
bellious persons to be speedily suppressed by 
execution to death, according to the justice of 
martial law; he is appointed provost marshal 
with authority by the magistrates, to attack 
and seize such notable, rebellious and incor- 
rigible oflFenders, and in the presence of the 
magistrate to execute them openly, on the 
gallows." * » * 

"This peremptory style of suspending the 
Common Law was a stretch of prerogative 
without an adequate parallel, so far as I know, 
in any former period." Id., 143, 144; 4 Hume't 
Hit. Eng., p. 344. 



It must be remembered that these high-handed 
measures took place in the sixteenth century, 
a period when both religious and political 
revolutions were rife in Europe; that the life 
of Elizabeth was more than once the object of 
conspiracies, both foreign and domestic; that 
the ablest men in Europe were parties to and 
prompters in these perfidious and bloody 
schemes [Motley's Dutch Republic, vol. 2, part 3, 
p. 333; and D' Israeli's Curiosities of Literature, 
1st. ser., p. 166); that the very persons at 
whom these proclamations were aimed, had, in 
the preceding reign of her sister, employed the 
same agencies for the overthrow of her religion 
in the kingdom, and the destruction of her 
friends; that the constable's and marshal's 
court, "whose jurisdiction was considered as 
of a military nature," and whose proceedings 
were not according to the course of the com- 
mon law, had "sometimes tried offenders" — 
not soldiers — by what was called martial law, 
"either during or not long after a serious re- 
bellion; " and, above all, that, at the time of the 
last-mentioned proclamation, the queen was a 
very old woman, and, it may be, somewhat 
subject to fits of ill temper. All these things 
must be reckoned in her favor, to mitigate the 
judgment of history against these arbitrary 
measures; but still can not save the acts them- 
selves from the indignant condemnation of 
mankind. Accordingly, we find Lord Coke, 
in the next reign, condemning utterly the doc- 
trine that the king's proclamation can either 
alter, repeal, or suspend the law, or make that 
criminal which before was not. He says: 

"The King can not create any offense by his 
prohibition or proclamation, which was not an 
offense before; for that was to change the law, 
and to make an offense which was not; for ubi 
non est lex, ibi non est transgressio : therefore that 
which can not be punished without proclama- 
tion, can not be punished with it." "But," he 
further remarks, "we do find divers precedents 
of proclamations which are utterly against 
law and reason, and for that void; guce contra 
rationem juris introducta sunt, non debent trahi in 
consequentiam " — i. e., measures introduced con- 
trary to the reason of the law, ought not to be 
drawn into consequence, or precedent. Again, 
he says that it had been held that the king, by 
his proclamation, can not create any offense 
which was not an offense before, "for then he 
may alter the law of the land by his procla- 
mation, in a high point; for, if he may create 
an offense where none is, upon that ensues fine 
and imprisonment. Also, the law of England 
is divided into three parts — common law, 
statute law, and custom; but the King's procla- 
mation is none of them. Also, malum aut est 
malum inse, aut prohibitum, that which is against 
common law is malum in se, malum prohibitum is 
such an offense as is prohibited by act of Par- 
liament, and not by proclamation." 12 Rep., 
pp. 74, 75, 76. 

Yet, notwithstanding the law was thus co- 
gently laid down in the time of James the 
First, we, nevertheless, find Charles the First, 
in the first year of his reign, endeavoring to 
return to the bad and unlawful measures of 
his predecessors. He accordingly addressed a 
commission to Lord Wimbleton, 28th Decern- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



207 



ber, 1625, empowering "him to proceed against 
■soldiers, or dissolute persons joining with 
them, who should commit any robberies, etc., 
which, by martial laio, ought to be punished 
with death, by such summary course as is 
agreeable to martial laio." He, also, issued 
another commission of the same kind, in 1626. 
See Hallam's Const. His., p. 223, and note. 

These unlawful proclamations, among other 
grievances, subsequently moved Parliament to 
demand of His Majesty the justly celebrated 
Petition of Right, which forever put an end to 
all colorable pretenses of their legality. Let 
it be observed, too, that this great act is but 
declaratory of the common law. No measure 
was ever supported on the side of the Parlia- 
ment with greater force of talents and learn- 
ing; or opposed by the King with worse show 
of reason, or more barefaced attempts to de- 
ceive the public, and to prevent its final pas- 
sage. Among the managers of the Commons, 
on that occasion, may be reckoned the great 
names of Coke and Selden — two names that 
may, perhaps, be equaled, but certainly not 
surpassed, for learning and ability, in English 
history. Under their management, the measure 
was finally perfected and passed; and became 
a new guaranty of Anglican liberty. I shall 
make no apology for reading here such parts 
of it as I deem pertinent to the subject under 
consideration. They are as follows: 

"And whereas, also, by the statute called 
the Great Charter of the Liberties of England, 
it is declared and enacted, that no freeman 
may be taken or imprisoned, or be disseized 
of his freehold or liberties, or his free customs, 
or be outlawed, or exiled, or in any manner 
destroyed, but by the lawful judgment of his 
peers, or by the law of the land. 

"And in the eight and twentieth year of the 
reign of King Edward III, it was declared and 
enacted by authority of Parliament, that no 
man, of what estate or condition that he be, 
should be put out of his lands or tenements, 
nor taken, nor imprisoned, nor disherited, nor 
put to death, without being brought to answer 
by due process of law. * * * 

"And whereas, also, by authority of Parlia- 
ment in the five and twentieth year of the 
reign of King Edward III, it was declared and 
enacted, that no man should be forejudged of 
life or limb against the form of the Great 
Charter and the law of the land; and by the 
said Great Charter, and other, the laws and 
statutes of this your realm, no man ought to 
be adjudged to death but by the laws estab- 
lished in this your realm, either by the 
customs of the same realm, or by acts of Par- 
liament: and whereas, no offender of what 
kind soever, is exempted from the proceedings 
to be used, and punishments to be inflicted by 
the laws and statutes of this your realm: 
nevertheless, of late time, divers commissions 
under your Majesty's great seal have issued 
forth, by which certain persons have been 
assigned, and appointed commissioners with 
power and authority to proceed within the 
land according to the justice of martial law 
against such soldiers, or mariners, or other 
dissolute persons joining with them, as should 
commit any murder, robbery, felony, mutiny. 



or other outrage or misdemeanor whatsoever; 
and by such summary course and order as is 
agreeable to martial law, and as is used in 
armies in time of war, to proceed to the trial 
and condemnation of such offenders, and them 
to cause to be executed and put to death ac- 
cording to the law martial. 

"By pretext whereof some of your Majesty's 
subjects have been by some of said commis- 
sioners put to death, when and where, if by 
the laws and statutes of the land they had 
deserved death, by the same laws and statutes 
also, they might, and by no other ought, to have 
been judged and executed. 

"They do, therefore, humbly pray your Most 
Excellent Majesty * that the afore- 

said commissions for proceeding by martial 
law, may be revoked and annulled; and that 
hereafter no commissions of the like nature 
may issue forth to any person or persons 
whatsoever to be executed as aforesaid, lest 
by colour of them any of your Majesty's sub- 
jects be destroyed, or put to death contrary to 
the laws and franchises of the land." 

And to this prayer the King was finally 
compelled to answer, '■'■Soitfait comme est desire — 
be it as it is desired." 2 Pari. His., p. 374, et 
seq.; and Creasy on the Eng. Const., pp. 260-264. 

But this act was no sooner passed than the 
perfidious King set about violating its provi- 
sions; whereby he finally drove his Parliament 
and the people into open rebellion against him. 
In the contest which ensued they beat him, took 
him, and beheaded him, by the judgment of a 
tribunal not better in point of constitution- 
ality than those by which he had doomed 
many of his subjects to death. The engineer 
was thus literally "hoist with his own petard." 
"The curse," which he had more than once 
sent abroad over his kingdom, thus, at last, 
"came home to roost." 

It is necessary for our purpose to notice in 
detail the measures of the next two reigns. 
Let it suffice for the present to say that in the 
31 Car. 2, the justly celebrated habeas corpus 
act was passed, and the personal liberty of the 
subject thereby more effectually guaranteed 
than ever before; and that for attempting to 
procure its repeal, dispense with acts of Par- 
liament, by commissions or otherwise, and 
other similar illegal measures, his brother, 
James the Second, was obliged to abdicate, 
and fly the kingdom, and William and Mary 
were called to the throne. 1 Macaulay'a His. 
Eng., p. 186; 2 Id., 3; Id., 62, 64. 

Upon the accession of William and Mary, 
the great principles of Anglican liberty were 
again distinctly asserted in the Bill of Rights; 
and all the guarantees thereof reaffirmed. 
Creasy on the English Constitution, p. 284, et seq 
Since that event there has been no trial of 
any citizen by martial law in Great Britain. 
The writ of habeas corpus has been suspended 
often; and in two instances, arising from both 
rebellion and invasion, martial law has been 
proclaimed; but it has never been carried 
further than to the arrest and imprisonment 
of suspected persons, until trial by the ordi- 
nary tribunals could be had. One would think, 
too, from a perusal of the State Trials which 
followed these invasions and rebellions, that 



•208 



TREASON TRIALS AT ISTIAXAPOLIS. 



the punishments inflicted were both certain 
and san^inarr enough to satisfv all the ends 
or State justice. It will be understood, of 
course, that I speak of the iuTasions of the 
Pretender in 111b, and again in 174-5. But 
that I am not mistaken in regard to the fact. 
that martiai lav was not. in either instance, 
enforced to the trial and punishment of anr 
citizen, and has not been in anj other instance 
since or before, subsequent to the abdication 
of James the Second. I beg leare to show bj 
reference to the case of Grant t. Gumld. 2 JSy. 
Bl. Rfp^ SV: and the following passage from 
DeLolme's excellent treatise on tke CSmwAIm- 
tum: 

-' At the time of the invasions of the Pre- 
tender, assisted by the forces of hostile nations, 
the Itabeax corpus act was. indeed, suspended 
^which. by the bv. mav serre as one proof, 
that in proportion as a government is in dan- 
ger, it becomes necessary to abridge the lib- 
erty of the subject \ but tke &ta*ue fomerl 
did not (fcct of ittelf ftretek iis ornn mmtkonHf. The I 
precaution was deliberated upon and taken ' 
by the representatives of the people ; and the 
detaining of individuals in consequence of i 
the suspension of the act. was limited to a 
certain fixed time. Notwithstanding the just 
fears of internal and hidden enemies, which 
the circumstances of the times might raise, 
the deviation from the former course of law 
was carried no further than the single point 
we have mentioned. Persons detaine-l by 
order of the Government were to be dealt with 
in the same manner as those arreste'l at the 
sui: of private individuals: the procee^lings 
against them were to be carried on no other- 
wise than in a public place: they were to be 
tried by their peers; and have all the usual 
legal means of defense allowed them — such as 
the calling of witnesses, peremptory chal- 
lenges of jurors," etc, DeLobme oa the Co/uL, ; 
by Maegrtgo r . p. 27-L | 

It has been supposed by many that wtarlial 
iixvr was proclaimed in England, in 17S€(. 
during the great Protestant riot, headed in its 
:r.,':piency by the celebrated Lord George 
G.rion. It is a mistake, however, due, per- 
haps, to the discussions in Parliament soon 
atter that event, in relation to the Kings 
ordering the military to suppress the riot, 
and which was done by direct military force. 
Ii was supposed, then, by many members of 
Parliament, that this eovM not be done with- 
out a declaration of ■■! ft'af Inr: and in that 
view the proceeding was condemned by them, 
and especially by those in the opposition. 
Two speeches, however, in the House of Lords, 
may be regarded as triumphantly maintaining 
the contrary opinion. I allnde to the speeches 
of Lord Chief Jastice Mansfield anl Lord 
•"^'*'' ••»" -T Thnrlow. In order that the Com- 
iv see the ground on which the ac- 
V military was placed by these great 
men and by Parliament — for that body adopted 
their views — I shall submit a brief quotation 
from that of the former, which has ever since 
been regarded by the English bar as an au- 
thority. It is as follows: 

" I presume it is known to His Majesty's 
confidential servants, that every individual in 



his private capacity, may lawfully interfere 
to suppress a riot, much more to prevent acts 
of felony, treason and rebellion. Not only is 
he authorixed to interfere for such purpose. 
but it is his duty to do so: and. if called upon 
by a magistrate, he is punishable in case of 
refusaL What any single individual may 
lawfully do for the prevention of crime, and 
preservation of public peace, may be done by 
any number assembled to perform their duty 
as good citiiens. It is the peculiar business 
of all constables to apprehend rioters, to en- 
deavor to disperse all unlawful assemblies, 
and. in case of resistance, to attack, wound, 
nay. kUl those who continue to resist : taking 
care not to commit tinnecessary violence, or 
to abuse the power legally vested in them. 
Every one is justified in doing what is neces- 
sary for the faithful discharge of the duties 
annexe»l to his office, although he is doubly 
culpable if he wantonly commits an illegal 
act. tinder the color or pretext of law. The 
persons who assisted in the suppression of 
these tumults, are to be considered mere pri- 
vate individuals, acting as duty require«l. 

" My Lords, we have not been living under 
marti'ii law. but under that law which it has 
long been my sacred function to administer. 
For any violation of that law. the offenders 
are amenable to our ordinary courts of jus- 
tice, and may be tried before a jury of their 
countrymen. 

"Supposing a soldier, or any other military 
person, who acte<i in the course of the late 
riots, had exceeded the powers with which he 
was invested. I have not a single donbt that 
he may be punished not by a eottrt-miartiaL bat 
upon an indictment to be found by the grand 
inquest of the city of London, or the county 
of Middlesex, and disposed of before the er- 
mined Judges sitting in Justice HalL at the 
Old Bailey. Consequent^, the idem ia/tdte thmt 
iKt an tirimf wider m wdHtmry fomermmemtf or that 
timee the t o m a mmt o mteia of the riofs mmffmrt of tho 
law*, or of Ike ftwft'l i rti w i , hn kea wiyfaJrf , or 
dupeiued with. I beliere that ranch mischief 
has arisen from a misconception of the Riot 
Act. which enacts that, after proclamation 
made, persons present at a riotous assembly 
shall depart to their homes, and that those 
who remain there above an hour afterward, 
shall be guilty of felony, and liable to suffer 
death. From this it has been imagined that 
the military can not act. whatever crimes 
may be committed in their sight, till an hour 
after such a proclamation has been made, or 
as it is termed, the "Riot Act' is read. But the 
riot act only introduces a new offense — ^re- 
maining an hour after the proclamation — 
without qualifying any pre-existing law. or 
abridzing the means which before existed for 
preventing or pnnishins crimes." 2 Cam^ 
UUt Lnet of the CUef Jtatieea. pp. 401. 4»K. 

The same can not be said, however, of the 
dependencies of the British crown. Indeed, 
Ireland, the Indias. and other provinces have 
been frequently subjected to the rigors of 
wttrrtiai law — the will of the king's lieutenants, 
or of the commanding general. But then, it 
must be remembered that wtmrtiml taw has not 
been the only hardship or oatrage indicted 



TREJiSOX TRIALS AT IXDIAXAPOLIS. 



209 



Tip«n tiiem. Anj eae vke vill but read tke 
trial of WuTCB Ibstugs^ Bost be satisied, 
BMviibsnBdiBg lusaeqaittal. that ia kereol- 
oaies aad d^pead^eieB. Great Britain ialietB^ 
permits, or eaa aot prvTeat great catuaoB 
against tke people. Wbo does aot xeMeadMar 
to kaTv read of tke terriUo pvaialuaeata ua- 
fiieted daria g tke SepoT rebellioa ? A aaa of 
seasibQitT eaa see, "^ia tbe mind's eTe," tka 
^viTeriBf ftafmeats of the rietims of amHial 
ter fljiag tkroagk the air. as ther are Uova 
from the moatle of cannon ; and jet OTea Um 
holr horror whi«Ji our SagUsh eovsias maal- 
f«st at oar eraeltr in the preseat var, has aot 
won oar ftror for their mild and Christiaa 
warfare as practiced in India, liar ve nerer 
be von to approxe or practice sveh lessons of 
hamanitT ! Ther reallj se^ to retard their 
proriaces as sabjeet to tte absotate irill of tint 
domestic goremment, -wvrj mnek as our law 
books treat our territories. Tko Oonstihition 
and laws do not exist for than. It was to rid 
ihemselTes of saeh a relation, and from the 
^^pressions incident to it, that the people of 
America rebelled against the parent coantix; 
and, after eight rears of war, esublished 
their independence and freedoai. 

Bat before I qai« tMs salgeet, I beg leaTe to 
Boiice two CJLses occorring in roMita posses- 
sions of Great Britain, and lAich have be- 
come marked in hickory, from the ftct that 
tkej were brought within tke reach, and sab- 1 
jecied 10 tke pablie opinion and laws of that j 
island. 

Ike first of tkeae, is the ease of Colonel 
Wall, Go'vemor of Garee. It seems tkat tkis 
officer, span seme ^pr^ension of mntinr in 
tke fisiees at kis post — an apprekension wkick ■ 
maj or may not kaTo been weU foanded. so 
far as I hare been able to learn from tke xerj 
meager report of tke eridenee found in tke 
.^aaMri M^iUtr for 180^ p. 360 — conrened a ' 
dra m k ead eeoit-martial one OTening upon - 
dress-parade, and ordered a sergeant before it 
for immediate triaL Tke OdwI adjudged him 
gnilrr. and sentenced kim to receiVe eigkt 
hundred lankeo, wkick were tkereapoa In- 
dicted on tke spot, by tke serrants of tke Got- j 
ernor, who stood by and urged tkem lo lay on. , 
emploving language indicatire of great pas-i 
sion. The sergeant died of the flogging. Tke 
Governor returned to England, wkere. after 
some two or three years had elapsed, ke was! 
arrested on a charge of murder. He escaped. : 
and remained absent for soTenieen or eighteen 
years, when he returned to England, was re- 
arrested, indicted, tried at the Old Bailey, con- 
Ticted. and hungfor murder. in 1S02. Cuseasej 
strongly marks the light in ttMi 1i ■aifiaffnw lu 
regarded when enforced against Englishmen ; 
and the writer of the report of the trial in tke 
Btfuter, employs the whole case as an illus- 
tration, on the one hand, of the harshness of 
wtartiml law; and, on the other, of the impar-' 
tial justice of English courts and juries. j 

The second case is that of missionary Smith, 
in Demarara. He was a missionary to the ne- ! 
groes of that colony. Among these, in 1823 or ! 
1?24. an insurrection broke out : merhal /«vwas ' 
proclaimed; and the rebellion almost imme- 
diately supt>ressed. Harine already incurred 
U 



tke iD-viD of tke planters, as tke reward ?f 
kis kindness to tkeir slaxes. he wiis arres;ed 
on a charge ef knTing kad kaowle^ige of the 
insanreetMn keftxe ^ fket, and idling to 
eommnniente it to tke avtkorities: and was 
Vrongkt to trial vpon tkis ckarge before a 
eonrt-marda], and conrieted and sentenced to 
be knng. Betere tke time fbr kis exeentioa aiw 
rived, kavever, ke kad died of eonsnmptiea. 
Tkis tkiti alone, it wonid se«B, fkttm wkat snb- 
se^n^tly transpired in Parliament, saxed tke 
parties to tkis trial — tke GoTernor and mem- 
bets of tke court — fktntbeingproeeeded against 
criminally. Sir James Mackiatosk. in a 
speeek af great power, delivered before the 
Honse of Oommons in regard to tkis case, said 
tkat "tke acts of tkis court were nollities, 
and tkeir meeting a conspiracy: that their 
sentence was a direction to commit a crime; 
tkat if they had been obeyed, it would not 
haxe been an execution, but a maider: and 
tkat they, and all other parties engaged in it, 
must hare answered for it with their liresi,"' 
JRacclloMmn Eim^f. etc p. »42, Lord Brctug- 
kam. in a masterly speech deliTored on the 
same occasion, maintained and demonstrated 
tke nuUitT of tke sentence, and tke crimin- 
ality of tke court. 1 ^mdho, p. S90-391. Oat 
of Parliament, the EHmhuf Mtiiim took up tke 
case, in an unanswerable and seatking arti- 
cle of more than forty pages, and oondoaned 
the whole proceeding to ererlasting in&my. 
40 Tol_ p. ±>6. ^Old Series). 

I hare been able to find but two instances 
in whick the British Goxemment declared 
wtmrtiml Imm in this coantry daring tke BeTO> 
lationary War. Tke first of these occurred at 
Boston. Massachusetts. June 12. 177-5. at which 
time General Gage issued his proclamation of 
aMTlisI fnr. resting it expressly upon the 
ground that owing to the rebellion of the peo- 
ple, the ordinary courts of justice were closed, 
and the course of justice therein stopped; 
and tke consequent necessity of proclaiming 
■M tial Imm as a stibstitute for the common 
law. Let it be remembered, that this was . 
nearly two months after the battles of Con- 
cord and Lexington, and but nre days before 
that of Bunker Hill, and that Boston was, at 
the time, almost in a state of siege, and it will 
scarcely be thought, by any one living in otir 
country to-day. that this procedure was pre- 
mature. NeTertheless. in the opinion of 
Americans of that day. it was an outrage well 
wortky to crown all the rest for which they 
were then every-where rushing to arms. It 
was spoken of in the old Congress as an at- 
tempt "to supersede the course of the com- 
mon law. and instead thereof, to publish and 
order the use of wtartiml latt." Jovmiil c/ :.\e 
Old Ou^rtt*. 147; Aim. £9. 177o. p. 2^U. ' 

GoTemor Dunmore adopted a similar meas- 
ure in Virginia, November 7tli. 177-5. which 
the Virginia Assembly met and denounced as 
••an assumed power which the King himself 
can not exercise; because it annuls the laws 
of the land, and introduces the most execra- 
ble of all systems — martia} law." 4 An. Ar- 
ekirff, S7: Amm, S-ip. 177-5. p. 2S. 

Sometime after the close 0: the \rar of In- 
dependence, and about the time of the adop- 



210 



TREASOX TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



tion of our present Constitution, I believe in 
the year 1787, a rebellion occurred in tlie 
State of Massachusetts. It is known in his- 
tory as Shay's Rebellion. When it became too 
strong for the civil arm of the State govern- 
ment, and the militia were finally called out, it 
was not to supersede the civil authority, but 
was strictly employed in aid thereof. The 
writ of habeas corpus was, indeed, suspended 
for a brief period; but no martial law was pro- 
claimed or enforced against the insurgents. 
On the contrary, Governor Bowdoin directed 
General Lincoln to "consider himself, in all 
his military offensive operations, constantly 
as under the direction of the civil officer, say- 
ing when any armed force shall appear and 
oppose his marching to execute these orders." 
lu this way, the rebellion, though formidable 
both for its numbers, and the extensive sym- 
pathy it received among the people of the 
State who did not yet openly engage in it, was 
put down almost without bloodshed; and 
peace, order and good feeling were restored. 
I am now brought to the era of the Federal 
Constitution; and we can form some notion 
of what was, most likely, the opinions and 
sentiments of its authors in relation to martial 
kno, as an incident of the Government they 
were about to establish for themselves. They 
had received their notions of law from a 
country in w\i\(ih martial law had not been exer- 
cised for more than one hundred years; they 
had suffered, in two instances, during the late 
war, the outrage of martial law; and had re- 
pelled and denounced it as wholly incompati- 
ble with the limitations imposed by law upon 
the King's prerogative. They had claimed the 
great acts of English liberty as their rightful 
inheritance. (4 Franklin s Works, 274). They 
had asserted their independence; because, 
among other reasons, the King "had aifected 
to render the military independent of, and su- 
perior to, the civil power," which was sim- 
ply an attempt to establish martial law. And, 
finally, they had just seen a formidable domes- 
tic rebellion in one of the States, go down be- 
fore the local authorities thereof, without a 
declaration of martial law, and almost without 
the shedding of blood. Now, may I not ask. 
Is there a single fact in all the experience of 
these men, that could possibly have given rise 
to a wish on their part for a Government ca- 
pable upon every occasion, offered by invasion 
or rebellion, of suspending all its ordinary 
functions, and calling into play "the odious 
system of martial law?" On the contrary, we 
are led to conclude, that, with the ordinary 
feelings of men, they must have been utterly 
and intensely hostile to any such power in 
their Government. This would be our conclu- 
sion, if they had left us no record on the sub- 
ject. But they have left us their solemn tes- 
timony in the Constitution, and it completely 
sustains the conclusion to which we are led 
by reasoning from the history of the past, and 
their experience; for, if ever any Constitu- 
tion did entirely shut out the idea of any 
power being vested in any department of the 
Government to declare martial law, it is that 
of the United States of America. From its 
very nature, no less than by its express terms. 



any such power is rendered totally impossi. 
ble, while a vestige of the Constitution re- 
mains. Let us examine it, and see. 

In the first place, it is a Government created 
by a written constitution, which limits it to 
the exercise of specified powers. The first 
section of the instrument stamps its entire 
character. Thus: "All legislative power Aemn 
granted, shall be vested," etc. But this is not 
all. After granting tie powers intended for 
the Government, it limits them by express de- 
nials of others, which would otherwise have 
been embraced in those granted. The ninth 
section of the first article, is thus wholly de- 
voted to these denials of powers. Among 
these negative provisions are some utterly in- 
compatible with the notion that the framers 
of the Constitution could have entertained the 
thought, even for a moment, of conferring the 
power upon any department of the Govern- 
ment, to declare martial law over the whole 
United States, or any part of it, where the 
presence of embattled hostile armies had not 
already suspended all civil authority. Take 
a single instance: "The privilege of the 
writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, un- 
less when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, 
the public safety may require it." Now, we 
have already seen that martial law is the sus- 
pension of the civil law, and of all the func- 
tions of the civil government — not only of 
the writ of habeas corpus, but of all other pro- 
cess and laws whatever. Why should the Consti- 
tution limit the powerof suspending privileges 
to the writ oi habeas corpus alone, and strictly to 
cases of rebellion and invasion, "wheii the pub- 
lic sa/eti/ may require it," if its authors had un- 
derstood, or intended that, in every such case, 
all other provisions of the Constitution and 
laws, designed to protect the citizen against 
the encroachments of arbitrary power, might 
be suspended at pleasure, by the President, all 
over the country; or by any General, all over 
his department? The specific limitation of 
this power of suspension, to this one writ, in 
any extreme public necessity, the public 
safety, "in cases of rebellion or invasion," 
forever explodes the notion that they intended 
to confer, in such cases, the power to suspend 
all other writs and rights arising under the 
Constitution and laws of the land. The ex- 
pression of one excludes the rest. 

Let us, however, briefly consider this pre- 
tended power to proclaim martial law with 
special relation to a Government like ours — a 
Government with a written and limited Con- 
stitution. The power in question, provided it 
exists, must reside in some one, or in some 
two, or in all three of the departments of the 
Government. The categories are exhaustive. 

It will not be pretended that it resides in 
the Judiciary alone; nor, indeed, that any 
portion of it is vested tlierein. All writers 
who have supported the power, are silent as to 
any portion of it residing in the Judiciary. 
But not only so, the Supreme Court itself, 
when called to discuss the subject, seem to 
regard it as vested elsewhere by the Constitu- 
tion, provided it exist at all. This is as it 
should be; for that department is, by its char- 
ter, confined to the exercise of judicial funo* 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



211 



tions; and it will not he claimed that the 
entire suspension of such functions, and the 
laws upon which they depend, is a judicial 
function. Such a suspension of the Judi- 
ciary must come from without that depart- 
ment. It has to do with the laws, and with 
rights and wrongs under them; and as long 
as a case is presented to the courts under ex- 
isting laws, they must, from their nature, 
needs act upon it. But this constitutional 
necessity under which the Judiciary is placed, 
is directly at war with the nature and exist- 
ence of martial law, which puts an end, for the 
time being, to the courts. In other words, 
martial law can only exist when the courts 
have ceased to exist. As long as they remain 
open, martial law remains impossible. Hence, 
the courts can not possess any power to de- 
clare, or aid others in declaring martial law. 
The power in question must, therefore, reside 
in the Legislative or Executive departments 
separately; or in both together, provided it 
exist at all. 

Is the power in question vested in Congress 
alone? If so, then what follows upon its ex- 
ercise? Have you ever thought of that? If 
you have not, let me show you what must be 
the result. It is this: A declaration of mar- 
tial law would, for the time being, put an end 
to the functions of Congress; and it would do 
80, by placing an absolutely unlimited power 
in the hands of the President, or of his Gen- 
erals. Now, if Congress had this absolute 
power to bestow, does not all history tell us 
that once gone from their hands, it would be 
gone forever? But you know that Congress 
has no such power to confer. A single limita- 
tion upon the powers of Congress gives the lie 
to any such assumption of power as is implied 
in a proclamation of martial law. And yet the 
whole charter of Congress is hedged in by 
limitations — nothing but limitations; limita- 
tions as to the subjects of their jurisdiction; 
limitations as to their mode of proceeding in 
the attainment of specified objects; and limit- 
ations by the express reservation of all powers 
not granted to the Federal Government, to the 
people or the States. All the powers denied 
to Congress in the Constitution, leave that 
body so much less power than is necessary to 
a proclamation of martial law. All the powers 
reserved to the people and States by the Con- 
stitution, is a further limitation of the power 
requisite to a proclamation of martial law. All 
the power legitimately in the hands of the 
Judiciary, is still a further limitation of the 
power requisite to enable Congress to establish 
martial law. And the same may be said of the 
rightful powers of the Executive. Hence, it 
is plain that Congress has no power to pro- 
claim or authorize the proclamation of martial 
law, which, according to the definition thereof, 
given by all writers on the subject, makes the 
will of the Commander-in-chief the supreme and 
only law of the land; or, to use the language of 
Mr. Webster, empowers the "ofiicer clothed 
with it, to judge of the degree of force that 
the necessity of the case may demand; and," 
he adds, "there is no limit to this, except such as 
is to be found in the nature and character of the 
exigency." Webxter's Works, 6 vol., pp. 240, 241. 



But grant for the argument, that Congress has 
this power, what would be the inevitable result 
of its exercise? All history tells us that such an 
act would be the suicide of the National Legis- 
lature. All liberty, all laws designed to secure 
liberty, all free institutions would perish by 
the rash act; for what would laws, liberties, 
institutions, or life itself be worth, when all 
were placed at the will of an absolute master? 
The exigency in which such power passed 
from the representatives of the people, would 
be readily continued by him on whom it was 
conferred. The Government would be changed 
by the act from the freest to the most simple 
and absolute despotism on earth. Congress, 
therefore, has no such power to confer: 1. 
Because it is incompatible with the limitations 
imposed upon the powers of that body, both 
by denial and reservation. 2. Because it 
would be a power of self-destruction; and we 
can not justly hold that it was intended by 
the framers of the Constitution, that any Con- 
gress should, in its discretion in a given 
emergency, put an end, not only to its own 
existence, but to the possible existence of any 
future Congress. 

If the power in question belongs to the 
President alone, then, in times of invasion or 
rebellion — times like these — the Constitution 
of the country affords no better guaranty for 
the security of the lives, liberty, and property 
of the people, than his will. And is that the 
end of the labors and solicitude of Washing- 
ton and his compatriots, for the establishment 
of a free people upon the American continent? 
What signifies a limitation on the power of 
the Judiciary and on that of Congress, if the 
President has, in any event, an unlimited 
power over both, and all else in the land? 
The power, then, does not belong to the Presi- 
dent alone. 

The same result is attained, if the power to 
proclaim martial law is conceded to reside in 
the Congress and President jointly; or, in- 
deed, in all the departments of the Govern- 
ment together; for its exercise involves the 
transformation of the entire Government from 
one limited and free, at least in form, to one 
unlimited and despotic, both in form and in 
fact. So that, in any view we can possibly 
take of this power, it can not exist in a lim- 
ited government created by a written consti- 
tution. It is, indeed, an absurdity too gross 
to be admitted, until all pretense of liberties 
and rights on the part of the people is utterly 
abandoned. 

But let us now glance at the war power con- 
ferred by the Constitution upon the Govern- 
ment, and ascertain where it is vested. Is 
any part of it bestowed upon the President 
by original constitutional grant? If not, upon 
what basis are we to rest the stupendous pow- 
ers claimed for him, as the foundation of 
your jurisdiction? Let us examine, and see 
how he stands. 

He is, I grant, appointed Commander-in- 
chief by the Constitution; but where is his 
command? It is in the discretion of Congress. 
If that body determine to have no army, why, 
then, the President can have none to command. 
If Congress takes the same view in regard to 



212 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



a navy, the Pi-esident, again, will be in pre- 
cisely the same situation as a naval officer. 
Without an act of Congress, he can not, there- 
fore, raise a single soldier, or seaman, or build 
a ship, or fort, or do any other military act 
whatever. If Congress do not raise an army, 
he can have no military power to repel inva- 
sion, or suppress insurrection. But, if Con- 
gress authorize him to raise an army and 
navy, and provide him with the means neces- 
sary to the end, they may still provide just 
such rules and regulations for the government 
thereof as they please, and may thus leave 
him little or no power over either. The same 
is true of the militia of the several States. 
They are to be organized, armed, and discip- 
lined accoi'ding to the will of Congress; and 
Congress alone has power to provide for call- 
ing them forth to execute the laws of the 
Union, suppress insurrection, and repel inva- 
sion. The President is powerless on all these 
subjects until Congress invigorate him. The 
very terms which designate him as Command- 
er-in-chief of the army and navy, and of the 
militia of the several States, limit his power 
over the last, until they are "called into the 
actual service of the United States." Is it not 
preposterous, then, to say of such an officer — 
one so entirely dependent upon Congress for 
every element of military power, and bound 
to accept it, subject to just such rules and 
regulations as they impose — that he is, never- 
theless, authorized, upon a given emergency, 
"to sweep the Constitution and laws of the 
country by the board," as Mr. Adams expressed 
it; to annihilate, for the time being, all the 
powers and functions of Congress and the 
Judiciary, by virtue of this same power, thus 
dependent upon Congress; and, going still 
further, to create a new political society, by 
equalizing all the people of the several States, 
by abolishing their several governments and 
institutions, and consolidating them into one 
social and political state, subject to one law 
only — his own mere will; for this is martial 
law. The power contended for by the Judge 
Advocate, as the basis of your jurisdiction, 
leads to this monstrous result; and some of 
the opinions cited in support of it, may even 
go to this extent. 

It is, therefore, plain to my mind that the 
several departments of the Government do not 
possess the power in question, either jointly 
or severally; for, if given, it would be a power 
to subvert the Constitution and overthrow the 
Government. 

But the nature and objects of the political 
society over which the Government of the 
United States was organized to preside, pre- 
cludes the idea that any such power, as that 
of declaring martial law, can exist therein. 
That society is confined and limited in its 
objects and purposes by the Constitution; and, 
in fact, has no existence beyond the terms of 
that instrument. The relations that in all 
consolidated nations most deeply and nearly 
interest mankind, and most strongly bind 
them together, are not embraced in the pur- 
poses and scope of the Federal Union at all. 
It is in the States that the great elements and 
relations of political society are principally 



found. The Government of the Union can 
not, therefore, assert the power in question, 
for two reasons, namely: 

1. Because the people of the several States 
of the Union have formed no society — no com- 
munity — beyond that which results from the 
terms of the Constitution. 

2. Because the exercise of such a power by 
the Federal Government would destroy the 
several distinct societies now represented by 
the several State governments; and to such 
destruction neither the people nor the govern- 
ments of the States have ever consented. 

But from such destruction of the States fol- 
lows inevitably the destruction of the Federal 
Government; for the States are in many and 
essential regards constituents of that Gov- 
ernment, which can not exist without them. 

That the Federal Government is thus limited 
by its Constitution, and from the special char- 
acter of the political society upon which it 
rests, is proven by its whole history. It can 
not, like a government of general powers, 
with no limitations upon them which it may 
not by its own legitimate act remove, exercise 
any power not conferred upon it by the char- 
ter of its creation. If its officers should do 
so, their acts are not the acts of the Govern- 
ment; but simply the acts of the individuals 
who do them; and are in no wise binding 
upon the people who have never consented to 
them. Whitaker v. English, 1 Bay's Rep., 15; 
Thayer v. Hedges et al., 22 Ind. Rep., 282; Wil- 
cox V. Griffin, 21 Id., 370; and Little et al. v. 
Barreme et al., 2 Cranch's Rep., p. 170. 

In thisrespect the British Government has 
greatly the advantage over ours; for there are 
no written limitations upon its powers, which 
Parliament — being omnipotent — may not ex- 
pand or remove altogether. A declaration of 
martial law by an act of Parliament; or under 
an authority granted thereby; or with the 
assurance that an act of indemnity will fol- 
low it, is in no wise inconsistent with the 
British Constitution. The highest written ele- 
ment in that constitution does not rise above an 
act of Parliament. Parliament, at all times, rep- 
resents the entire sum of all the politico-social 
capability, or possibility of the whole country. 
It may, therefore, properly take any step it 
may deem necessary for the conservation of 
the society over which it presides. As Parlia- 
ment itself is but a means to an end — the 
preservation and well-being of that society — 
it may, in a great emergency, without viola- 
ting any fundamental principle, surrender its 
own existence. And yet, a declaration of 
martial law is said to be unconstitutional there, 
by a high legal and military functionary of 
that country. HougKs Precedents in Military 
Law, p. 543. 

In view of all this, it seems passing strange 
that the Government of the United States 
should ever have been compared with that of 
Great Britain in relation to the establishment 
of this transcendent fact; and still more 
strange that the President should have been 
set up as the equal in this respect of the 
King — nay, as his superior. The entire pro- 
ceedings of the convention that framed the 
Constitution, go to discountenance any such 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



213 



position. They intended to create an execu- 
tive with altogether less authority than the 
King of Great Britain; and they succeeded 
in doing so> if it is possible to impose limita- 
tions by means of a written Constitution. 
How they regarded this part of their work, 
after its accomplishment, may be learned from 
the Federalist. (No. 69 HallowelVs ed., 1831, p. 
347). It is not contended that the king can 
rightfully suspend the writ of habeas corpus; 
but in times of great emergency, he is per- 
mitted to do so until the next meeting of Par- 
liament, when an act of indemnity must be 
passed for the protection of those who were, 
in anywise, engaged in such suspension, 
against civil prosecutions on account thereof. 
Now, this act of indemnity is an admission of 
the original illegality of the previous suspen- 
sion; for it is passed for the purpose of curing 
it, and giving it the sanction of law. But 
Dr. Francis Lieber maintains that there can 
be passed no valid act of indemnity by a 
government created by, and acting under a 
written Constitution like ours; and this opin- 
ion he cites in a second treatise published 
many years after his work on Legal and Polit- 
ical Hermeneutics was given to the public. 
{Hermeneutics, pp. 79, 80; and Civil Liberty and 
Self- Government, vol. 1, p. 134). If argument 
were wanting to support this authority, it 
arises from the very nature of our Constitu- 
tion. But I leave it to stand upon the authox'- 
ity of a great name, adorned not only by great 
learning devoted to the noblest purposes of 
science; but, also, to the support of the cause 
of his adopted country in the existing struggle 
for the integrity of its territory and the su- 
premacy of its Constitution. And yet, I 
know, there are not wanting men, native to 
the manor born, who claim that the President 
has the power, under the Constitution, to sus- 
pend the writ of habeas corpus . But do they 
forget that no such opinion was ever expressed 
by any one who had a hand in framing the 
Constitution, or who lived and acted with 
them ? Mr. Jefferson did not think so. (2 
Jefferson's Corresp., pp. 274, 291 ; Id., 344). On 
the contrary, he went to Congress and asked 
for a suspension of the writ at the time of 
Burr's conspiracy; and, while they refused to 
suspend it, not a member of that body was 
found to question the fact that the power to 
pass such an act, under proper circumstances, 
was vested in tht-m. 3 Benton's Debates in 
Congress, p. 504 ei seq. 

About the same time, in the case of two 
men imprisoned by order of the President for 
complicity in that conspiracy, Chief-Justice 
Marshall, in speaking upon the writ of habeas 
corpus, and the act of Congress which author- 
izes judges and courts of the United States to 
grant it, said : 

"It may be worthy of remark that this act 
was passed by the first Congress of the United 
States, sitting under a Constitution which had 
declared ' that the privilege of the writ of 
habeas corpus should not be suspended, unless 
when, in cases of rebellion or invasion, the 
public safety may require it.' Acting under 
the immediate intiiuenceof this injunction, they 
must have felt with peculiar force the obliga- 



tion of providing efficient means by which 
this great constitutional privilege should re- 
ceive life and activity ; for if the means be not 
in existence, the privilege itself would be lost, 
although no law for its suspension should be 
enacted. Under the impression of this obli- 
gation, they gave all the courts the power of 
awarding writs of habeas corpus. * * ® 

"If, at any time, the public safety should 
require the suspension of the powers vested 
by this act in the courts of the United States, 
it is for the Legislature to say so. That question 
depends on political considerations, on which 
the Legislature is to decide. Until the legislative 
will be expressed, the court can only see its duty, 
and must obey the laws." 4 Cranch's Reports, pp. 
75, 137. 

In this opinion concur all respectable au- 
thorities that I have been able to consult. 
Among them are Rawle, Sedgewick, Story, 
and the late Chief-Justice Taney. Raiole on 
<^eCoMs<.,pp.ll4, 115; 2 Story ontheConst.,l\M1; 
Sedgewick on the Const, and Statute Law, p. 598 ; 
and 9 Am. Law Reg., p. 524. 

But if the President has no power to sus- 
pend the writ of habeas corpus, and Congress 
no power to indemnify him, and those acting 
under his orders, for forcibly denying it, then 
it follows that he can not have the far greater 
power of proclaiming martial law — a power 
which embraces the suspension not only of 
the writ of habeas corpu?,, but of all other writs 
and laws, even the Constitution itself. 

And hence, I conclude, that there is not, and 
can not possjibly be, any power in a government 
like ours to declare martial law, unless it be 
upon the theater of active military opera- 
tions; and that every such declaration of mar- 
tial law, in any State or place, not subject to 
such operations, is mere naked unauthorized 
force, and altogether unjustifiable; that the 
true test of the presence, in any State or 
place, of such military operations as justifies 
a proclamation of martial law, is found in the 
fact that the courts of justice therein are 
closed, and the administration of justice 
stopped by the presence of hostile armies; 
that, whenever that is not the case in any part 
of the United States, martial law, in no possible 
view, can rightfully exist; and, finally, as the 
courts of justice in this State are proven, in 
this case, to be open at this time, and to have 
been so all the time, both before and since the 
arrest of the accused, any attempt to enforce 
martial law against them is a grievous wrong, 
not only to them, but to the whole country; 
and, indeed, to the general cause of freedom 
and free government throughout the world. 

While upon this branch of the subject — the 
power to declare martial law — I beg leave to re- 
peat a few propositions urged in a former 
trial. I am now prepared to support them by 
high military authority, which was not then 
at hand. They are as follows: 

"The charges in this cause involve capital 
and infamous crimes; and the Constitution of 
the United States expressly provides that 

"'No person shall be held to answer for a 
capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless 
on a presentment or indictment by a grand 
jury; except in cases arising in the land or 



214 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



naval forces, oi' in the militia when in actual 
service in time of war or public danjrer.' 
{Amend. Const. U. S., Art. 5). And, again, 'in 
all criminal cases, the prisoner shall enjoy 
tlie right to a speedy and public trial, by an 
impartial jury of the State and district where 
the crime shall have been committed,' etc. 
Amend. Const., Art. 6. 

" These pi-ovisions were adopted after the 
organization of the Government of the United 
States under the present Constitution, and for 
the purpose of placing the trial by jury en- 
tirely beyond the power of Congress, and of 
all other branches of the Government. The 
Constitution, as originally adopted, contained 
the following provision on the subject: 'The 
trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeach- 
ment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall 
be held in the State where such crime shall 
have been committed.' (Art. 4, g 2). So jeal- 
ous were the people of the right in question 
that they required the amendments I have al- 
ready quoted, notwithstanding this original 
provision. 

"The accused are citizens of the United 
States, and of the State of Indiana, not in the 
land or naval forces, or in the militia in ac- 
tual service. They are, therefore, not within 
the exception of the fifth article of amend- 
ments just cited. The exception does not af- 
fect their right any more than if it did not 
exist. [On the contrary, it makes it alto- 
gether more clear and undeniable]. These 
several provisions are absolute as to them; 
!ind if any constitutional provisfons can pro- 
tect a right, it would seem they ought to be 
protected from a trial not in conformity with 
them. Indeed, it would seem, they can not, in 
fairness, be tried without being first presented 
or indicted by a grand jury, nor without a 
petit jury of the district wherein their alleged 
offenses were committed." 

Lieutenant General Scott, in his Aiitohiog- 
raphi/, republishes an article published by him 
in the National Intelligencer, in 1842. From 
this article I extract the following paragraphs, 
which immediately follow the amendments 
of the Constitution alrea<ly quoted: 

"If these amendments do not expressly se- 
cure the citizen, not belonging to the army, 
from the possibility of being dragged before a 
council of war, or court-martial, for any crime, 
or on any pretense whatsoever, then there can 
be no security for any human right, under any hun 
man institutions I 

"Congress and the President could not, if 
they were unanimous, proclaim martial law, in 
any portion of the United States, witliout first 
throwing those amendments into the fire. If 
Mr. Madison (begging pardon of his memory 
for the violent supposition) had sent an order 
to General Jackson to establish the odious 
code over the citizens of New Orleans, during, 
before, i)r after the siege of that capital, 
it would have been the dvity of the General, 
under his oath, to obey the Constitution, and 
to have withheld obedience; for, by the Ninth 
Article of War (the only one on orders), officers 
are not required to obey any but ' lawful com- 
mands.' " Vol. 1, p. 292. 

Again, he says: 



"When Pompey played the petty tyrant at 
Sicily, as the lieutenant of that master despot 
Sylla, he summoned before him the Mammer- 
tines. That people refused to appear, alleging 
that they stood excused by an ancient privi- 
lege granted them by the Romans. 'What,' 
said Sylla's lieutenant, 'will yoti never have 
done with citing laws and privileges to men 
who wear swords.' Roman liberty had already 
been lost in the distcmperature of the times. 
* ■:■;- » jf Pompey had gained the battle of 
Pharsalia, would his odious reply to the Mam- 
mertines have been forgiven by the lovers of 
human liberty? With such maxims of Govern- 
ment, it Avas of little consequence to the Ro- 
man world that Caesar won the day. A Verres 
would have been as good as either." Id., p. 294. 

He also gives the following fact in our own 
history, which, although a little out of its 
place, I yet beg leave to insert as indicative 
of the spirit in which the struggle of 1776 
was conducted by the founders of our Gov- 
ernment: 

"In South Carolina, during the Revolution- 
ary War, at the moment when Sir Henry 
Clinton was investing the devoted city of 
Charleston, and the tories in arras every- 
where, the Legislature empowered her excel- 
lent Governor, John Rutledge, after consulting 
with such of his council as he conveniently 
could, 'to do every thing necessary for the 
public good, except the taking away of the life of 
a citizen without legal trial.' Under that excep- 
tion, at a time when there was no Constitution 
of the United States, there was no Louallier 
deprived of the one, and put in jeopardy of 
the other, by martial law." Id., pp. 297, 289. 

But the same distingtiished General has 
consistently, throughout his whole life, main- 
tained the same opinions on this subject. In 
the month of October, 184G, he submitted to 
Secretary Marcy a projet for the purpose of 
enabling generals of our armies, then in the 
field in ^Mexico, to enforce martial law for the 
protection of our armies against lawlessness 
on the part of the people of that country, and 
the people against lawlessness on the part of 
our soldiers, in cases not provided for in our 
Articles of War. In this communication, 
among many other things, he says: 

"It will be seen that I have endeavored to 
place all necessary limitations on martial law. 
1. By restricting it to a foreign hostile coun- 
try. 2. To offenses enumerated with some 
accuracy. 3. By assimilating councils of war 
to courts-martial. 4. By restricting punish- 
ments to the known laws of some one of the 
States," etc. 

And, having shown the course usually pur- 
sued by British commanders, under like cir- 
cumstances, he proceeds to say: 

"This law" — he was asking for an act of 
Congress — "can have no constitutional, legal, or 
necessary existence within the United States. 
At home, even the suspension of the writ of 
hahea.i corpus by Congress, could only lead to 
indefinite incarceration of an individual, or 
individuals, who, if further punished at all, could 
only be so through the ordinary or common law 
of the land." 5 Exec. Doc, 30 Congress, 1st 
session, Doc. 59, pp. 50, 52. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



215 



This projet. apparently so reasonable and so 
necessary, was, however, never adopted by the 
administration of Mr. Polk; and we accord- 
ingly find the Secretary of War, about the 
same time, directing General Taylor to release 
from confinement, and send out of his lines, a 
notorious murderer, because the Articles of 
AVar did not then authorize his trial by a 
court-martial, although he was a soldier. And 
so the Articles of War remained until the 
present rebellion, notwithstanding the inter- 
national laws and usages of war clearly 
clothed our generals, in the enemy's country, 
with the power requisite to punish such of- 
fenses by martial law. Grotius, De Jure Belli ac 
Pads, lib. 3, cap. 8; VatteVs Law of Nationis, lib. 
3, cap. 8; and Wheaton^s Elements of Interna- 
tional Law, part 4, cap. 2. 

Since the present rebellion began, Congress 
have enlarged the jurisdiction of courts-mar- 
tial over soldiers, so as to embrace such cases. 
In the same act, too, they have made the pun- 
ishments affixed to such crimes by the laws of 
the State where they may be committed, the 
measure, in one respect at least, of the pun- 
ishments to beinflicted by such courts. The act, 
however, is limited in its operations to soldiers. 
Hence, I infer that it was not intended to extend 
to citizens; and this upon the long established 
principle, " that affirmatives in statutes that intro- 
duce new laws do imply a negative of all that is not 
in the purview." Hoharts Rep., p. 298. 

It might readily be shown that, upon all the 
principles of construction and interpretation 
applicable to constitutional provisions in re- 
gard to the right of trial by .jury, that they 
occupy a favored relation to the other provi- 
sions of that instrument. In the first place, it 
stands among the reserved rights of the peo- 
ple. It is, as it were, placed in a Bill of 
Rights: and is thus entitled to a favorable, or 
liberal construction, as in favor of liberty, and 
against the powers granted, which, simply be- 
cause they are encroachments upon liberty, 
must be strictly construed. There are no 
rules better established in our constitutional 
jurisprudence than these. Besides, amend- 
ments must always prevail as against provi- 
sions conflicting with them; and the right of 
trial by jury is secured by amendments to tlie 
Constitution. If they had not been so named, 
the mere fact that they were adopted after the 
Constitution, and by equal authority to that 
by which it was adopted, entitles them to pre- 
vail against any provision conflicting with 
them; for as it is not possible for one Parlia- 
ment, or Congress, to bind the hands of a sub- 
sequent one, so one generation of the people 
can not bind the next, or even itself, at a sub- 
sequent time. 

I disagree with the opinion expressed by 
Mr. Attorney General Gushing, in an opinion 
which I have already quoted, in which he 
seems to hold that these provisions in respect 
to the right of trial by jury, are of but little 
value, on account of the very general terms 
in which they are expressed. He should have 
remembered, however, that they were adopted 
by the framers of the Constitution from an- 
cient English laws, and had received a fixed 
and practical signification and application for 



ages. Mr. Justice Story was not inclined to 
regard them as mere " glittering generalities;" 
for he thus descants upon the rights they 
secure: 

"It seems hardly necessary, in this place, 
to expatiate on the antiquity or importance of 
the trial by jury in criminal cases. It was 
from very early times insisted on by our ances- 
tors, in the parent country, as the great bul- 
wark of their civil and political liberties; and 
watched with an unceasing jealousy and so- 
licitude. The right constitutes one of the fun- 
damental articles of Magna Charta, in which 
it is declared: '■Nullus homo capiatur. nee im- 
prisonetur, aut ezulit, aut aliqtio modo distruatur, 
etc.; nisi per legale judicium pariiim suorum, vel 
per legem terrce ; no man shall be arrested, nor 
imprisoned, nor banished, nor deprived of life, 
etc., but by the judgment of his peers, or by 
the law of the land.' The judgment of his 
peers here alluded to, and commonly called, in 
the quaint language of former times, a trial 
per pais, or trial by the country, is the trial by 
a jviry, who are called the peers of the party 
accused, being of the like condition and equal- 
ity in the State. When our more immediate 
ancestors removed to America, they brought 
this great privilege with them, as their birth- 
right and inheritance, as a part of that ad- 
mirable common law which had fenced round 
and interposed barriers on every side against 
the approaches of arbitrary power. It is now 
incorporated into all our State Constitutions 
as a fundamental right, and the Constitution of the 
United States loould have been justly obnoxious to 
the most conclusive objection, if it had not recog- 
nized and confirmed it in the most solemn terms. 

" The great object of a trial by jury in crim- 
inal cases is to guard against a spirit of op- 
pression and tyranny on the part of rulers; 
and against a spirit of violence and vindic- 
tiveness on the part of the people. Indeed, it 
is often more important to guard against the 
latter than the former. The sympathies of all 
mankind are enlisted against the revenge and 
fury of a single despot, and every attempt 
will be made to screen his victims. But how 
difficult is it to escape from tlie vengeance of 
an indignant people, I'oused to hatred by un- 
founded calumnies, or stimulated to cruelty 
by bitter political enmities, or unmeasured 
jealousies! The appeal for safety can, under 
such circumstances, scarcely be made by in- 
nocence in any other manner than by the se- 
vere control of courts of justice, and by the 
firm and impartial verdict of a jury sworn to 
do right; and guided solely by legal evidence, 
and a sense of duty. In such a course there 
is a double security against the prejudices of 
judges who may partake of the wishes and 
opinions of the Government, and against the 
passions of the multitude, who may demand 
their victim with a clamorous precipitation. 
So long, indeed, as this palladium remains sa- 
cred and inviolable, the liberties of a free gov- 
ernment can not wholly fall. But to give it real 
efficiency, it must be preserved in its purity 
and dignity, and not with a view to slight in- 
conveniences, or imaginary burdens, be put 
into the hands of those who are incapable of 
estimating its worth, or are too inert, or too 



210 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



ignorant, or too imbecile to wield its potent 
armor. Mr. Justice Blackstone, with the 
warmth and pride becoming an Englishman, 
living under its blessed protection, has said: 
' A celebrated French witer, who concludes, 
that because Rome, Sparta, and Carthage have 
lost their liberties, therefore those of England, 
in time, must perish, should ha-ve recollected 
that Rome, Sparta, and Carthage, at the time 
their liberties were lost, were strangers to the 
trial by jury.' 

" It is observable that the trial of all crimes 
is not only to be by jury, but to be held in the 
State where they are committed. The object 
of this clause is to secure the party accused 
from being dragged to a trial in some distant 
State, away from his friends, and witnesses, 
and neighborhood, and thus to be subjected to 
the verdict of mere sti-angers, who may feel 
no common sympathy, or who may even cher- 
ish animosities or prejudices against him. 
Besides this, a trial in a distant State or Ter- 
ritory might subject the party to the most op- 
pressive expenses, or, perhaps, even to the in- 
ability of procuring the proper witnesses to 
establish his innocence. There is little dan- 
ger, indeed, that Congress would ever exert 
their power in such an oppressive and unjus- 
tifiable a manner. But, upon a subject so vital 
to the security of the citizen, it was fit to leave 
as little as possible to mere discretion. By 
the common law, the trial of all crimes is re- 
quired to be in the county where they are 
committed. Nay, it originally carried its 
jealousy still further, and required that the 
jury itself should come from the vicinage of 
the place where the crime was alleged to be 
committed. This was certainly a precaution, 
which, however justifiable in an early and 
barbarous state of society, is little commend- 
able in its more advanced stages. It has been 
justly remarked that, in such cases, to sum- 
mon a jury, laboring under local prejudices, 
is laying a snare for their consciences, and 
though they should have virtue and vigor of 
mind sufficient to keep them upright, the par- 
ties will grow suspicious, and indulge other 
doubts of the impartiality of the trial. It 
was doubtless by analogy to this rule of the 
common law, that all criminal trials are re- 
quired to be in the State where committed. 
But as crimes may be committed on the high 
seas, and elsewhere, out of the territorial ju- 
risdiction of a State, it was indispensable 
that, in such cases, Congress should be enabled 
to provide a place of trial." Story on the 
Const., ?? 1778, 1779, 1780, et seq. 

M. De Tocqueville, in discussing the insti- 
tution of the jury, gives very great weight to 
its character as a political institution. In 
times like these, we may, perhaps, learn some- 
thing of the value of what we now seem about 
to lose, even from the words of a foreigner, 
lie says: 

" The true sanction of political laws is to be 
found in penal legislation, and, if that sanc- 
tion be wanting, the law will sooner or later 
lose its cogency. He who punishes infractions 
of the late, is, therefore, the real master of society. 
Now, the institution of the jury raises the 
people itself, or, at least, a class of citizens, to 



the bench of judicial authority. The consti- ^ 
tutiou of the jury consequently invests the ' 
people, or a class of citizens, with the direc- 
tion of society." 1 Democracy in America, p. 
309. 

Again, he says: 

"The jury is pre-eminently a political in- 
stitution. It must be regarded as one form of 
the so^'ereignty of the people. When that sov- 
ereignty is repudiated, it must be rejected; or 
it must ^be adapted to the laws by which that 
sovereignty is established. The jury is that 
portion of the nation to which the execution 
of the laws is intrusted, as the House of Par- 
liament constitute that part of the nation 
which makes the laws; and in order that so- 
ciety may be governed with consistency and 
uniformity, the list of citizens qualified to 
serve on juries must increase and diminish 
with the list of electors." Id., 310. 

He further says: 

"The system of the jury, as it is under- 
stood in America, appears to me to be as di- 
rect, and as extreme a consequence of the 
sovereignty of the people as universal sufl"rage. 
The institutions arc two instruments of equal 
power, which contribute to the supremacy of 
the majority. All the sovereigns who have chosen 
to govern by their own authority, and to direct society 
instead of obeying its direction, have destroyed or en- 
feebled the institution of the jury. The monarchs 
of the house of Tudor sent to prison jurors 
who refused to convict, and Napoleon caused 
them to be returned by his agents." Id., p. 
310. 

How much it is to be regretted that any 
American citizen, and especially one in high 
position, should allow himself to be driven by 
the terrible condition of the country, or any 
other consideration, to disparage the trial by 
jury in criminal cases; and, in the very 
teeth of the Constitution of his country, pub- 
licly express his regret that the jury stands 
in the way of a system of penal admin isti'a- 
tion, which may be more certain to conform to 
his own private views of justice; and to hold 
,men to answer "charges of crimes" not "well 
defined by law." That any cause should have 
led an American citizen to such conclusions, 
is, I humbly conceive, one of the very worst 
signs of these evil times. If our country is to 
be successful in its present struggle, and if 
its liberties are destined to survive, the jury, 
venerable for its antiquity and sacred for its 
uses, must go with us, in all its vigor, through 
the Red sea, in the midst of which we are now 
journeying. To abandon it now, is to give up 
the contest for free government in which we 
are engaged. AVe must not, therefore, aban- 
don it in these dark days, and it will follow us 
again into the light, and long continue to pro- 
tect and bless us in the possession of a manly 
freedom, in the happy years to come. 

I think it has already been sufliciently 
shown, that there is, in fact, no power in the 
General Government, nor behind that, in the 
society wliich it represents, to proclaim martial 
law throughout the whole country. It may, 
perhaps, have a local operation, as a mere 
fact, resulting from the presence of hostile 
armies; but, in that case, it will exist without 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



217 



a proclamation as well as with it. Dr. Leiber, 
whom I have already quoted, and whose works 
are of the highest possible value on all sub- 
jects which he touches, in General Orders, No. 
100, 1863, of our War Department, fully sus- 
tains this view. He says, or rather the Com- 
mander-in-chief, speaking his words, says: 
" The presence of a hostile army proclaims its 
martial law." If, therefore, there be no right- 
ful power in the Government to proclaim mar- 
tial law over any part of its own territories, 
where the fact is not already established by 
events, then Indiana is certainly not under 
martial law to-day, and has never yet been. 

If, however, in the consideration of this 
branch of the subject, you should still hold 
that the Government, or any department there- 
of, may declare martial law without the pres- 
ence of the fact, then other questions nat- 
urally present themselves. Among these I 
may be permitted to ask the following: 

Has the Government of the United States, 
or any department thereof, declared martial law 
in the State of Indiana? 

Who has done it? — the President, or some of 
his generals? 

Has Congress authorized it? Let us exam- 
ine and see how the fact stands. Has that 
body taken that great, and, for themselves, as 
a department of the Government, it may be, 
final step? Surely Congress has not turned 
/elo de se. On the contrary, they have showed 
great prudence and discretion, as well as re- 
gard for the Constitution, and our free insti- 
tutions existing under it; while, at the same 
time, they have taken due care that the Republic 
may suffer no detriment. 

I can not more pointedly and briefly present 
the action of Congress on this subject than 
was done in the case of Mr. Dodd; and, there- 
fore, adopt what was then urged upon your 
consideration : 

" By an act approved July 31, 1864, (12 Stat, 
at Large, p. 284), conspiracies are defined and 
the mode of punishment prescribed, namely: 
by trial in the circuit or district courts of the 
United States, of the proper circuit or district. 
Can these parties be tried before any other 
tribunal? The defendants hold not. 

"By the President's proclamation of Sep- 
tember 24, 1862, suspending the privilege of 
the writ of habeas corpus, it was ordered, 'that 
during the existing insurrection, and as a nec- 
essary measure for suppressing the same, all 
rebels and insurgents, their aiders and abettors 
within the United States, shall be subject to 
martial law, and liable to trial and punishment 
by court-martial or military commission.' 
Without stopping to inquire whether this 
proclamation was authorized; and, if so, 
whether it embraced persons charged with 
committing a substantive offense, within a 
State not in insurrection, and where the 
United States courts were in full exercise of 
their powers, the defendants claim that it has 
been superseded by the act of Congress of the 
3d of March, 1868, [12 Stat, at Large, 775], re- 
lating to the writ of habeas corpus; and by the 
President's proclamation based thereon, of 
September 15, 1863. 

" The first section of this act of 1863, au- 



thorizes the President to suspend the writ of 
habeas corpus. 

"The second requires the Secretaries of 
State and War to report to the judges of the 
United States circuit and district courts the 
names of all persons held in military custody 
by order of the President, in their respective 
districts; and, if the grand juries of the 
proper districts fail to find bills, it is made 
the duty of the judges to have all such per- 
sons discharged, on taking the oath of allegi- 
ance, and giving bond, if required. 

"The third section provides that all persons 
so held, and not reported, shall be entitled to 
a discharge in the same manner as is pro- 
vided in the second section, after a failure, on 
the part of the proper grand jury, to indict 
them. 

"Here are all the sections of this act which 
bear on the question; and, it will be seen, 
that while they contemplate and sanction mil- 
itary arrests, they do not countenance or au- 
thorize military trials. On the contrary, they 
fairly discountenance them. 

"The President's proclamation, based on this 
act, limits the suspension of the habeas corpus 
to persons amenable to military law, or to the 
Rules and Articles of War. No order is con- 
tained in the proclamation in regard to trial, 
and the inference is irresistible, that the 
proper courts are left to act under the rules 
of law upon that subject; and these are too 
well defined to require comment. Civil courts 
try offenses against the law, committed by cit- 
izens — military courts try such as are sub- 
ject to the Rules and Articles of War; and the 
defendants claim that they do not fall within 
that class." 

I have been able to find no other act of Con- 
gress, passed since the 3d of March, 1863, 
which authorizes or countenances in any man- 
ner whatever the notion that it has, at any 
time, been the intention of that body to estab- 
lish martial law, or to authorize any one else to 
do so, or even to permit it. This act does, in- 
deed, authorize the suspension of the writ of 
habeas corpus, if Congress can transfer the dis- 
cretion conferred upon them by the Constitu- 
tion, to determine at what time, in the progress 
of an invasion, or rebellion, the emergency re- 
quired has arisen, when the public safety re- 
quires its suspension. That Congress can do 
any such thing, I deny; but do not choose to 
stop here to discuss the point, as it is not in- 
volved in this cause. 

If we admit, for the sake of argument, that 
Congress have invested the President with the 
power both to judge and to act in the proper 
emergency; and that he has well availed him- 
self of this power by publishing his procla- 
mation of September 15, 1863, what follows? 
Certainly not, that Congress have proclaimed, 
or authorized him to proclaim martial law; but 
have, on the other hand, by a controlling im- 
plication, provided that martial law, so far as 
the trial of a citizen is concerned, shall not be 
tolerated; but that such citizen shall, in all 
cases, when under military arrest, be turned 
over to the proper civil tribunals— the circuit 
or district courts, of the proper district — for 
trial according to law; or discharged either 



218 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIg. 



absolutely or conditionally, if no bill of in- 
dictment be found against him. And this har- 
monizes well with what Colonel Scott, in his 
Military Dictionary, lays down as the conse- 
quence of a declaration or proclamation of 
martial law within the United States. He says: 
"Within the United States, therefore, the ef- 
fect of a declaration of martial law would not 
be to subject citizens to trial by courts-mar- 
tial; but it would involve simply the suspen- 
sion of the writ of habeat carpus, under the 
authority given in the second clause of section 
nine of the Constitution, viz.: 'The privilege 
of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be sus- 
pended, jiinless when, in case of rebellion or 
invasion, the public safety may require it.' 

*f ■:■;■ -S- 

"The suspension of this privilege would 
enable the commander to incarcerate all dan- 
gerous citizens; but, when brought to trial, 
the citizen would necessarily come before the 
ordinary civil courts of the land." Military 
Dictionary, tit. 3Iartial Law. 

And such would seem to be the opinion of 
Mr. Attorney General Cushing, who says: 

"I say we are without law on the subject. 

"The Constitution, it is true, empowers 
Congress to declare war, to raise and support 
armies, to provide and maintain a navy, to 
make rules for the government of the land and 
naval forces, to provide for calling forth the 
militia to execute the laws of the Union, sup- 
press insurrections and repel invasions, and to 
provide for organizing, arming and disciplin- 
ing the militia, and for governing such part 
of them as may be employed in the service of 
the United States. But none of these powers 
has been exerted in the solution of the present 
question. 

"In the amendments of the Constitution, 
among the provisions of general right which 
they contain, are some, the observance of which 
seems incompatible with the existence of 7nar- 
tial law, or, indeed, any other of the supposable, 
if not necessary incidents of invasion or in- 
surrection. But these provisions are not 
sufficiently definite to be of practical appli- 
cation to the subject-matter. 

"In the Constitution there is one clause of 
more apparent relevancy, namely, the declar- 
ation that 'the privilege of the writ of habeas 
corpus shall not be suspended, unless when, 
in case of rebellion or invasion, the public 
safety may require it.' This negation of power 
follows the enumeration of the powers of Con- 
gress, but it is general in its terms; it is in 
the section of things denied, not only to Con- 
gress, but to the Federal Government as a 
government, and to the States. I think it 
must be considered as a negation reaching all 
the functionaries, legislative or executive, civil 
or military, supreme or subordinate, of the 
Federal Government: that is to say, that there 
can be no valid suspension of the writ of 
habeas corpus under the jurisdiction of the 
United States, unless when the public safety 
may require it, in casesof rebellion or invasion. 
And the opinion is expressed by the commen- 
tators on the Constitution, that the right to 
suspend the writ of habeas corpus, and also that 
of judging when the exigency has arisen, be- 



long exclusively to Congress." Siory^s Comm.y 
? 1342; 1 Tucker's Blackstone, p. 292. 

" In this particular, as in many o-thers, the 
Constitution has provided for a secondary in- 
cident, or a single fact, without providing for 
the- substance, or for the general fact; just as 
when it gives power to establish post-roads, 
but says nothing of the transportation of the 
mails. It does not say that martial law shall 
not exist, unless when the public safety may 
require it, in case of insurrection or invasion; 
but only that the writ of -habeas corpus shall 
notbe suspended, except in such circumstances. 
But, if the emergency of insurrection or in- 
vasion, involving the public safety, be requi- 
sitje to justify the suspension of the writ of 
habeas corpus, surely that emergency must be 
not the less an essential prerequisite of the 
proclamation of martial law, and of its consti- 
tutional existence. 

"We have in Great Britain several recent 
examples of acts to give constitutional exis- 
tence to the fact of martial law. One is the 
act of Parliament of the 3 and 4 Geo. 4, ch. 4, 
designed for the more effectual suppression of 
local disturbances in Ireland. Another act of 
that same nature, that of 57 Geo. 3, ch. 3, was 
for the case of apprehended insurrection 'in 
the metropolis, and in many other parts of 
Great Britain,' which act was followed the 
next year by the indemnifying act of 58 Geo. 
3, ch. 6. These examples show, that, in the 
opinion of the statesmen of that country, the 
general fact of the existence of martial law, and 
its incident, the suspension of the writ of ha- 
beas corpus, alike require the exercise of the 
power of the supreme legislative authority. 
(1 Blacks. Comm., p. 136, Coleridge's note; 
Boivyers Const. Law, p. 424). 

"That idea pervades the constitutional or- 
ganization of the several States of the Union. 
Thus, in Massachusetts, it is provided that the 
'writ of habeas corpus 'shall not be suspended 
by the Legislature, except upon the most ur- 
gent necessity, and pressing occasions, and for 
a limited time.' In other States, while the 
exigency for the suspension of the writ is 
defined, as in New York, the suspending au- 
thority is not specified. In others, there is 
express general provision, as to the suspension 
of laws, without specifying this writ — the 
general power of suspension being confided to 
the legislature, as in Maryland, Virginia and 
Tennessee. The St^xte of Pennsylvania has 
both provisions in its constitution. And it 
may be assumed, as a general doctrine of con- 
stitutional jurisprudence in all the United 
States, that the poiver to suspend laws, whether 
those gran tiny the writ of habeas corpus, or any 
other, is vested exclusively in the legislature of the 
particular State. 

"How intimate the relation is, or may be, 
between the proclamation of martial law and 
the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, is 
evinced by tlie particular facts of the case be- 
fore me — it appearing, as well hy the report 
of the Governor as by that of Chief Justice 
Lander, that the very object for which martial 
law was proclaimed was to prevent the use of 
the writ in behalf of certain persons held in 
confinement by the military authority, on the 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



219 



charge of treasonable intercourse with hostile 
Indians. That, however, is but one of the 
consequences of martial law, and by no means 
the largest or gravest of those consequences, 
since, according to every definition of martial 
law, it suspends, for the time being, all the 
laws of the land, and substitutes in their place 
no law, that is, the mere will of the military 
commander. 

"There may undoubtedly be, and have been, 
emergencies of necessity, capable of them- 
selves to produce, and, therefore, to justify 
Buch suspension of law; and involving, for 
the time, the omnipotence of military power. 
But such a necessity is not in the range of 
mere legal questions. AVhen martial law is 
proclaimed, under circumstances of assumed 
necessity, the proclamation must be regarded as the 
statement of an existing fact, rather than the legal 
creation of that fact. In a beleaguered city, for 
instance, the state of siege lawfully exists, 
because the city is beleaguered; and the proc- 
lamation of martial law, in such case, is but 
notice, and authentication of a fact, that civil 
authority has become suspended, of itself, by 
force of circumstances; and that, by the same 
force of circumstances, the military power has 
had devolved upon it, without having author- 
itatively assumed, the supreme control of af- 
fairs, in the care of the public safety and con- 
servation. Such, it would seem, is the true 
explanation of the proclamation of martial law 
at New Orleans by General Jackson." 8 
Opi7iions Atty's Gens, of U. S., stipra. 

Now, this whole opinion establishes, I think, 
beyond successful controversy, three points, 
namely: 

1. That an act of Congress is necessary to a 
suspension of i\\Q writ oi habeas corpus ; 

2. That the suspension of that writ is em- 
braced in a proclamation of martial laiv as one 
of the incidents thereof; and, 

3. That, a fortiori, Au act of Congress is neces- 
sary to authorize a proclamation of martial law. 

We are thus, again, on solid footing; for, in 
all cases where a proclamation of martial laiv is 
necessary, Congress must act — must authorize 
it before it can properly issue. Hence, mar- 
tial law can only be declared by act of Con- 
gress directly; or by act of Congress con- 
ferring authority on some other department or 
of&cer of the Government to make such proc- 
lamation. The measure, in either case, must 
proceed from Congress. 

But a brief examination of the acts of Con- 
gress, passed since the commencement of the 
current rebellion, will satisfy you that Con- 
gress has not interfered in this matter either 
by direct or indirect means, except as already 
noticed, to deny any such power to the Presi- 
dent, or those under him. If, therefore, mar- 
tial law must, in any case, be brought in by an 
authoritative declaration, proclamation or 
other public act, before it can properly exist, 
then no such declaration or proclamation has 
yet been made, or act done; and for the best 
of all possible reasons, namely: Congress has 
not authorized any such declaration or proc- 
lamation to be made, or act to be done, and it 
can not, on our present hypothesis, be done 
■without such authority. 



I believe the Judge Advocate will find it ex- 
ceedingly difBcult to turn to any act of Con- 
gress conferring any such authority. The act 
of the 3d of March, 18G3, is at war with any 
such authority ; for why should Congress au- 
thorize the suspension of the writ of habeas 
corpus, if they intended to confer the greater 
power to declare martial law? Above all, why 
should they prescribe terras upon which mili- 
tary prisoners, not of war, should have a trial 
in the ordinary courts of the land, and, in 
case of a failure to indict them, should be al- 
lowed habeas corpus for their discharge ? All 
this is quite opposed to any disposition, on 
the part of Congress, to confer any such au- 
thority; and, indeed, is quite at war with any 
act done by the President, before the passage 
of that act, either for the suspension of the 
writ of habeas corpus, or the establishment of 
martial law. 

But, suppose that, although you should hold,, 
as I conceive you must, that the President can 
not suspend the writ of habeas corpus without 
an act of Congress authorizing him to do so, 
you should yet maintain that he can, without 
any act of Congress, exercise the all-embrac- 
ing power of establishing martial law all over 
the country, then the question arises: 

Has he established martial law? 

We have been told that the President estab- 
lished martial law by his proclamation of Sep- 
tember 24, 1802, which has been held up here 
as the solid basis of your authority to sit in 
judgment on the lives of the citizens of Indi- 
ana, who are not in the militai'y or naval ser- 
vice of the United States, and have not been, 
if ever, for many years. But this proclama- 
tion is co-extensive with the territories of 
the United States; and, if in force any-where, 
it must beevery-where throughout the country. 
In this view, it is here, and suspends the civil 
laws and institutions of this State; and of all 
other States of the Union. Is such a supposi- 
tion consistent with facts? Can it be recon- 
ciled with the subsequent action of the Presi- 
dent himself? It is, on the contrary, di- 
rectly contradicted by the acts both of Con- 
gress and the President. Thus, the act of 
Congress of March 3, 1863, six months subse- 
quent to the proclamation, authorizes the Pres- 
ident to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, but 
provides for a report of his military prison- 
ers, not of war, to the proper courts at every 
term, and for their trial therein if indicted; 
but, if not indicted, then for their discharge, 
provided they have been imprisoned twenty 
days. These provisions are wholly incompat- 
ible with the force and eifect of every part of 
the proclamation of September 24, 1862; and 
no less with the notion that martial laiv had ac- 
tually been proclaimed and was in force, than 
with the notion that it should, in the future, 
be proclaimed, or exist in future in any place 
whei-e the fact of war had not suspended the 
civil law, and closed the civil courts. 

Yet what do we find? The President ap- 
proved this act, and subsequently acted under 
it as the law of the land; and, of course, as 
the true exposition of the Constitution in re- 
spect to his power over the subjects it em- 
braced. It is a plain expression, on the part 



220 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



of Congress and of the President, that the 
writ of habeas corpus can only be suspended by 
law; and that imprisonment of citizens by or- 
der of the President, or his inferiors, shall 
hereafter have a limit entirely independent of 
his will. Every circuit and district court, 
within its jurisdiction, is to be, under this 
act, a jail delivery to the military prisons of all 
persons, like the defendants, either by trial, 
or discharge without trial. I may repeat here 
the rule of interpretation applicable to stat- 
utes which bring in new remedies, namely: 
What is afiBrmed in such acts of one thing, is 
denied of all others. [Hobari, supra']. Then, 
as the civil courts are, by this act, expressly 
given jurisdiction of these cases, either to 
try, or, if no indictment be found, to discharge 
the prisoners, it follows that the jurisdiction 
of them is denied to military courts or com- 
missions. 

The President accepted the act of March 3d, 
1863, as the negative of his proclamation of 
September 24th, 1862. Otherwise, why did he 
afterward issue another proclamation to sus- 
pend the writ of habeas corpus ? If the former 
proclamation was valid, that writ was already 
suspended; and his second could add nothing 
to the force of the first. But the first procla- 
mation contained a declaration of martial law. 
Now, if this was valid, it carried along with 
it, as its inseparable incident, the suspension 
of the writ of habeas corpus; and, if it is still 
in force, then the act of Congress authorizing 
a subsequent suspension thereof, and the proc- 
lamation to carry the same into eflfect, issued 
on the 15th of September, 1863, both proceed 
on a false basis; for it is taken for granted in 
both these measures, that the writ of habeas 
corpus was not, at the date of either of them, 
suspended, which could not have been the case, 
had either Congress or the President regarded 
martial law as then in force; for martial law, as 
already defined, always carries with it the 
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus. In 
his proclamation of September 15th, 1863, the 
President makes no allusion to martial law, 
manifestly intending to leave it just where the 
act of Congress had left it. This silence on 
the subject in the last proclamation clearly 
shows that the President, at its date, regarded 
himself as restrained by the act of Congress 
to the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus; 
and did not design to transcend the authority 
thereof, by a declaration of martial law. 

But there is a still later act of the Presi- 
dent's, that, in my opinion, utterly overthrows 
all pretense that martial law is now in force in 
the State of Indiana. The act to which I refer 
is the following proclamation: 

"Whereas, By a proclamation which was 
issued on the 15th day of April, 1861, the 
President of the United States announced and 
declared that the laws of the United States 
had been for some time past, and then were, 
opposed, and the execution thereof obstructed, 
in certain States therein mentioned, by com- 
binations too powerful to be suppressed by the 
ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by 
the powers vested in the marshals by law; 

"Anp whereas, Immediately after the issu- 
ing of the said proclamation, the land and 



naval forces of the United States were put 
into activity to suppress the said insurrection 
and rebellion; 

"And whereas. The Congress of the United 
States, by an act approved on the third day of 
March, 1863, did enact that during said re- 
bellion the President of the United States, 
whenever in his judgment the public safety 
may require it, is authorized to suspend the 
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus in any 
case throughout the United States, or any part 
thereof; 

"And whereas, The said insurrection and 
rebellion still continue, endangering the ex- 
istence of the Constitution and Government 
of the United States; 

"And whereas, The military forces of the 
United States are now actively engaged in 
suppressing the said insurrection and re- 
bellion in various parts of the States where 
the said rebellion has been successful in ob- 
structing the laws and public authorities, 
especially in the States of Virginia and 
Georgia ; 

" And whkreas, On the 15th day of Sep- 
tember last, the President of the United States 
duly issued his proclamation, wherein he 
declared that the privilege of the writ of ha- 
beas corpus should be suspended throughout the 
United States in the cases where, by the au- 
thority of the President of the United States, 
military, naval and civil oflBcers of the United 
States, or any of them, hold persons under 
their command or in their custody, either as 
prisoners of war, spies, or aiders and abettors 
of the enemy, or officers, soldiers, or seamen, 
enrolled, or drafted, or mustered, or enlisted 
in, or belonging to, the land or naval forces 
of the United States, or as deserters therefrom, 
or otherwise amenable to military law, or the 
rules and articles of war, or the rules or reg- 
ulations prescribed for the military or naval 
services by authority of the President of the 
United States, or for resisting a draft, or for 
any other ofi"ense against the military or naval 
service; 

"And whereas. Many citizens of the State 
of Kentucky have joined the forces of the insur- 
gents, and such insurgents have, on several 
occasions, entered the said State of Kentucky 
in large force, and not without aid and com- 
fort furnished by disaffected and disloyal 
citizens of the United States residing therein, 
have not only greatly disturbed the public 
peace, but have overborne the civil authorities 
and made flagrant civil war, destroying prop- 
erty and life in various parts of that State; 

"And whereas, It has been made known to 
the President of the United States by the of- 
ficers commanding the national armies, that 
combinations have been formed in the State 
of Kentucky with a purpose of inciting rebel 
forces to renew the said operations of civil 
war within the said State, and thereby to em- 
barrass the United States armies now operat- 
ing in the said States of Virginia and Georgia, 
and even to endanger their safety ; 

" Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, Pres- 
ident of the United States, by virtue of the 
authority vested in me by the Constitution and 
laws, do hereby declare that, in my judgment. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



221 



the public safety especially requires that the 
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, so 
proclaimed in the said proclamation of the 
15th of September, 1863, be made effectual and 
be duly enforced in and throughout the said 
State of Kentucky, and that martial law be for the 
present established therein. I do, therefore, hereby 
require of the military officers in the said State 
that the privileges of the writ of habeas corpus be 
effectually suspended within the said State, 
according to the aforesaid proclamation, and 
that martial law be established therein, to take ef- 
fect from the date of this proclamation, the said 
suspension and establishment of martial law to con- 
tinue until this proclamation shall be revoked or 
modified, but not beyond the period when the 
said rebellion shall have been suppressed or 
come to an end. And I do hereby require and 
command, as well all military officers as all 
civil ofiBcers and authorities existing or found 
within the said State of Kentucky, to take 
notice of this proclamation, and to give full 
effect to the same. 

"The martial law herein proclaimed, and the 
things in that respect herein ordered, will not 
be deemed or taken to interfere with the 
holding of lawful elections, or with the pro- 
ceedings of the constitutional Legislature of 
Kentucky, or with the administration of jus- 
tice in the courts of law existing therein, be- 
tween citizens of the United States in suits or 
proceedings which do not affect the military 
operations or the constituted authorities of the 
Government of the United States. 

"In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set 
my hand, and caused the seal of the United 
States to be affixed. 

"Done in the City of Washington, this fifth 
day of July, in the year of our 

[l. 8.] Lord one thousand eight hundred 
and sixty-four, and of the Inde- 
pendence of the United States the eighty- 
ninth. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. 

"By the President: 

"William H. Seward, Secretary of State." 

Now, I respectfully submit: Why should 
the President deem it necessary to proclaim 
martial law in Kentucky, if martial law was al- 
ready in force by a standing valid proclama- 
tion, not only in that State, but all over the 
Union? The question crushes the supposition. 
But the recitals of the last proclamation are 
equally destructive of it; and the special terms 
of the declaratory portion of the instrument 
go to the same end. Thus, it is declared that 
^■martial law be, for the present, established 
therein " — that is, in the State of Kentucky. 
But, according to the theory of the Judge Ad- 
vocate, martial law had already been estab- 
lished therein two years almost, prior to this 
proclamation; and in every other State of the 
Union. The President goes still further to 
overthrow the theory on which alone you can 
entertain jurisdiction of this cause; for he 
says, that the martial law "established" in 
Kentucky, by that proclamation, shall " take 
effect from the date" thereof, namely : the 5th 
of July, 1864. What nonsense is this procla- 
mation if the Judge Advocate is right in his 
assumption, that the proclamation of Septem- 
ber 24th, 1862, had already established martial 



law throughout the Union? If the President, 
on the other hand, is right, what nonsense is 
the assumption, that martial law is in force in 
this State? The President had reasons for 
his discrimination against Kentucky ; for ho 
recites them. But it is quite unnecessary to 
go into them. That he did discriminate against 
her, is enough to answer my purpose; and to 
place Indiana before you in a different condi- 
tion from that which she occupies in relation 
to martial law. Indiana is not yet touched 
with the curse 'of martial law. Kentucky is. 
I recur to the old rule of construction, and 
ask you to apply it to this proclamation. The 
expression of one excludes the rest — of Kentucky, 
Indiana. 

Then, there is no existence of martial law in 
Indiana ; for I will not enter again upon the 
question, whether the order convening this 
Commission, and the other ordering the ac- 
cused before it for trial, establish martial law. 
It was not convened until these men were im- 
prisoned for the offenses for which they are 
now on trial. These offenses must, of course, 
have been committed, if ever, before they were 
arrested. Then, on this hypothesis, you are 
convened to try them for offenses against mar- 
tial law, which had not been proclaimed, and 
did not exist until after their arrest ! 

Suppose, however, that there has, at any 
time, existed an intention, on the part of the 
President, or of the General commanding this 
district, to declare martial law, what have they, 
or either of them, done, to give vitality to 
such intention, or to establish it as a practical 
measure of public administration? What 
rules have they laid down to govern your ac- 
tion in its application ? What crimes have 
they said shall be punished by it? And how 
shall they be punished ? 

No general in the world in the present age, 
or, indeed, in any age, since the dawn of civ- 
ilization, has ever yet thought of establishing 
a martial law, the penalties whereof should be 
confined to his own breast, and that of his 
judges, until the moment they should fall with 
ruin and destruction upon its miserable sub- 
jects. God forbid that we should live to see 
such a system put into operation here! All 
writers on the subject agree that there must 
always be some notification of what the com- 
manding general intends may be done, and 
what not done, by the people under his sway, 
when he proclaims martial law. But has any 
such notification gone before these proceed- 
ings? Truly, I should like to know where we 
are, and what we are about. Who has de- 
fined the offenses you are to punish? What 
is to be the rule and measure of your punish- 
ments ? You are to select, I suppose, defini- 
tions and penalties at pleasure, from the 
boundless range of unlimited power; for, if 
martial law has been proclaimed, and is in force, 
all the laws of the land are suspended as to 
the accused, and to you, and to all. You are 
under no obligation to go to them, either for 
definitions or penalties, unless they have been 
adopted by the military power. But that power 
has adopted nothing, ordained nothing, defined 
nothing; in a word, has given us no definitions 
of offenses, and no measures of punishment. 



222 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



It was not thus that Wellington adminis- 
tered martial law; for he declares that the com- 
manding general is — mark the words — "bound 
to lay down distinctly the rules, and regulations, 
and limits, according to which his will" — 
which is martial law — "is to be carried out." 
HougKs Precedents in Mil. Law, p. 514. 

And so our own illustrious military chief- 
tain, Lieutenant General Scott, when he pro- 
claimed martial law in Mexico, and enforced it, 
prescribed rules for its administration. Let 
me show you how he proceeded in the matter. 
He did not surprise the people of Mexico, 
though they were aliens and enemies, by an- 
nouncing the advent of martial law, in the first 
instance, by arrests and trials. On the con- 
trary, he published a general order, in which, 
among other things, he said : 

"1. It is still to be apprehended that many 
grave offenses not provided for in the act of 
Congress 'establishing rules and articles for 
the government of the armies of the United 
States,' approved April 10, 1806, may be again 
committed — by, or upon, individuals of those 
armies, in Mexico, pending the existing war 
between the two republics. Allusion is here 
made to offenses, any one of which, if com- 
mitted within the United States or their or- 
ganized Territories, would, of course, be tried 
and severely punished by the ordinary civil 
courts of the land. 

"2. Assassination, murder, poisoning, rape, 
or the attempt to commit either; malicious 
stabbing or maiming; malicious assault and 
battery; robbery; theft; the wanton desecra- 
tion of churches, cemeteries, or other religious 
edifices and fixtures; the interruption of re- 
ligious ceremonies; and the destruction, except 
by order of a superior officer, of public or 
private property, are such offenses." 

Then, after going on and reciting the absence 
of any provision for the government of an 
army and people situated, as were the army 
of the United States and the people of Mexico, 
to each other, in our military code; and the 
necessity of such provision, and that it was 
found in martial law as a matter of necessity, 
he proceeded to order: 

"8. From the same supreme necessity mar- 
tial law is hereby declared as a supplementary 
code, in and about all cities, towns, camps, 
posts, hospitals, and other places, which may 
be occupied by any part of the forces of the 
United States in Mexico, and in and about all 
columns, escorts, convoys, guards and detach- 
ments of the said forces, while engaged in 
prosecuting the existing war in and against 
the said republic, and while remaining within 
the same. 

"9. Accordingly, every crime enumerated 
in paragraph No. 2 above, whether committed — 
1. By an inhabitant of Mexico, sojourner or 
traveler therein, upon the person or prop- 
erty of any individual of the United States 
forces, retainer, or follower of the same. 2. 
By any individual of the said forces, retainer 
or follower of the same, upon the person or 
property of any inhabitant of Mexico, so- 
journer or traveler therein; or, 3. By any 
individual of the said forces, retainer or fol- 
lower of the same, upon the person or prop- 



erty of any other individual of the said forces, 
retainer or follower of the same, shall be 
duly tried and punished under the said sup- 
plementary code. 

"10. For this purpose, it is ordered that all 
offenders in the matters aforesaid shall be 
promptly seized, confined, and reported for 
trial, before military commissions, to be duly ap- 
pointed, as follows: 

"11. Every military commission, under this 
order, will be appointed, governed and lim- 
ited, as nearly as practicable, as prescribed 
by the 65th, 66th, 67th and 97th of the said 
Rules and Articles of War, and the pi'oceed- 
ings of such commissions will be duly recorded 
in writing, reviewed, revised, disapproved or 
approved, and the sentences executed; all, as 
near as may be, as in the cases of the proceed- 
ings and sentences of courts-martial; pro- 
vided, that no military commission shall try 
any case clearly cognizable by any courts- 
martial; and provided, also, that no sentence 
of a military commission shall be put in ex- 
ecution against any individual belonging to 
this army, which may not be, according to the 
nature and degree of the offense, as estab- 
lished by evidence, in conformity with known 
punishments, in like cases, in some one of the 
States of the United States of America." 

The order covers many more topics, and 
presents a concise but masterly system for 
the administration of martial law, well worthy 
of the consideration of those who may be 
placed under a similar necessity to that which 
called it forth. It is manifestly the same 
which, nearly a year before its date, had been 
presented to the Secretary of War, and which, 
for some reason or other, that functionary had 
rejected, as I have already shown. The whole 
order will be found in Scott's Mil. Die, art. 
Martial Law, p. 382. 

Now, this order made all plain both for the 
army and the people; and, indeed, for the 
commissions sitting under it. There was cer- 
tainty as to the crimes punishable ; and, as 
far as practicable, as to the penalties to be in- 
flicted. There could be no great surprises in 
either. But how is it here, to-day? Are we 
not left quite out at sea? And are we not thus 
left without compass, or chart, or guiding star ? 
If such things be permitted, where will they 
end ? I will not pause to picture the wreck that 
surely awaits us, if we allow ourselves thus to 
drift on, over the pathless ocean that lies before 
us. I have no heart to think of it. 

You will not, therefore, entertain jurisdic- 
tion of this cause. I am sure you will not; 
for I can not see, where such jurisdiction can 
begin, on what principles it can rest, or how it 
can be justified. You will not, I beg leave to 
repeat, entertain jurisdiction, because — 

1. Such a jurisdiction is at war with the 
principles of constitutional liberty as derived 
by us from Great Britain, and embodied in the 
Federal Constitution; 

2. Such a jurisdiction is at war with all the 
liberal principles of the good old laws of 
Father-land, which our ancestors brought 
over with them, as their best birthright, to the 
wilds of America; 

3. Such a jurisdiction is at war with all the 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



223 



inspiring facts of our early history ; and ren- 
ders worse than useless the noble examples of 
the men of 1776; 

4. Such a jurisdiction is at war with the 
very nature of a limited constitutional gov- 
ernment; and strikes it dead as soon as we 
permit it to cross our national threshold; 

5. Such a jurisdiction nullifies the acts of 
Congress as well as the Constitution; 

6. Such a jurisdiction, in Indiana, is at war 
with the proclamations of the President; and 
would make him the author of the most ab- 
surd and monstrous folly, as well as of the 
grossest injustice ; 

7. Such a jurisdiction outrages the facts of 
our condition — our courts, both Federal and 
State, being open — and the laws of the land 
having therein free course and full power. 

In order to sustain such a jurisdiction, you 
must take the responsibility; for the General 
commanding has issued no order taking it 
upon himself; and the President is still more 
distant and disinclined to assume it. Why 
should you volunteer to do this thing? And 
why should you now take a step that may, in 
the future, be referred to as a precedent for 
the abolition of our liberties ? 



Under the administration of good honest 
men, almost any thing evil, in the way of pre- 
cedent, may remain harmless. They will not 
use it; or, if they do, suffer it to die with the 
evil exigency that called it forth. But if you 
now go on with this business, may there not 
come a time when the land shall mourn for its 
lost freedom — lost through the evil example 
of this hour? Then shall our children curse 
the evil day in which the bad precedent — a 
fatal departure from law and right — was left 
by us for their ruin. 

Mr. President and gentlemen, I have done. 
I know you have each defended our common 
country in the field; and, had it been your lot, 
would have cheerfully and nobly died to pre- 
serve its Liberty and Constitution from over- 
throw or harm. To-day, you have a greater 
duty to perform — a far more difficult one also. 
Perform it according to the Constitution and 
laws — according to justice and good con- 
science, as I trust you will, and posterity, 
more indebted to this day's work than to all the 
military achievements of the war in which 
we are now engaged, will rise up and call you 
blessed. 



ARGUMENT OF M. M. RAY, ESQ. 



Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission : 

In discharging this last delicate and re- 
sponsible duty to clients, I avail myself of 
the occasion to tender my acknowledgment 
to the Court and the Judge Advocate for the 
courtesy and kindness toward myself and 
clients, which we have uniformly enjoyed at 
your hands, during these long and otherwise 
painful trials. From day to day I have met 
the Court with increased pleasure, and have 
only to regret that our mutual duties may end 
with the crisis in the fate of each defendant, 
which will precipitate him into woe and mise- 
ry, or send him forth to the world again, " re- 
deemed, regenerated, and disinthralled." It 
is proper, too, that I should say to the Court, 
to my associate counsel, and to our clients, 
that the exhaustive discussion of the question 
of jurisdiction committed to the hands of our 
Brother Gordon, leaves nothing for me to say 
upon that subject. Learning and labor in his 
hands have achieved a splendid triumph. It 
is also due that I should say to Brother Cof- 
froth, that I am indebted to him for the very 
forcible and learned argument with which he 
has favored us on certain points which, for 
that reason, I fail to notice, and I here apprise 
him and -the Court, that I appropriate his 
learning and his logic, on these points, to the 
benefit of Mr. Humphreys and Colonel Bowles, 
when they are applicable. The question of 
jurisdiction is of common interest to all the 
accused. The question whether the secret 
order is, per se, a conspiracy, is likewise of 
common interest, but of greater interest to 
some than to others. I will consider it at 
some length. The charges and specifications 
are of common interest also, and I will briefly 
consider them. The evidence being individual, 
in the main, I shall only consider it in its re- 
lations to Mr. Humphreys and Colonel Bowles. 
But in all that I may say upon the charges and 
specifications, it must be understood, that only 
two of the charges are embraced in the terms 
of the President's Proclamation, declaring mar- 
tial law — upon which alone the Judge Advo- 
cate predicates the jurisdiction of this Court. 
If, then, this Court only has jurisdiction to 
try civilians by virtue of the existence of 
martial law, established by that proclama- 
tion, and that proclamation enumerates only 
two offenses, subject to trial by military com- 
mission, I might, it seems to me, safely leave 
the other three charges, with all the evidence 
touching them, to the candor of the Judge 
Advocate, for dismissal. The two offenses 
covered by the proclamation, are — 1st. Incit- 
ing insurrection. 2d. Giving aid and comfort 
to rebels. These, according to the proclama- 
tion, may be tried by military commission, 
and none others. 



Whatever may be the fate of the two unfor- 
tunate gentlemen, for whom I shall speak, I 
shall utter no word whose literal meaning, 
even, on the one hand, would tend lo subvert 
the fabric of Government, nor on the other to 
sanction the slavish abandonment of the priv- 
ileges of free, legal controversy. Every word 
that I shall utter, shall commend the Consti- 
tution and Laws of my country to the rever- 
ence and obedience, not only of this tribunal, 
but of all my misguided countrymen, whose 
credulity, fears and passions have placed 
them in a false position toward that Govern- 
ment, whose existence has been so causelessly 
imperiled by the conspiracies of traitors, and 
the storms of civil war. A gigantic civil war 
rages in our once proud and happy land — 
great armies are raised, organized, fight, and 
perish, to maintain the great political neces- 
sity of one flag and one nationality' — and 
whoever strikes an open blow for the rebel- 
lion in the South, or a secret one in the North, 
is an enemy of his country, in whom patriot- 
ism is dead, and is liable to be crushed by the 
iron hand of that Government, whose cause he 
has betrayed, and whose allegiance he has 
forsworn. The Northern people have risen 
to a sublime elevation of patriotism, and have 
declared that this Government, in its whole 
territorial jurisdiction and integrity, shall 
stand, and have pledged and dedicated the 
resources of the nation to the sacred work — 
all secret organizations have crumbled, and 
all factious opposition has fallen, and a united 
North will spring from the field of the late 
political conflict. All political rancor — all 
partisan clamor — all jealous intolerance of 
opinion — all governmental proscription for 
past differences, should cease. 

While it may be true, in a very general 
sense, as has often been said, that, in refer- 
ence to the struggle between the Government 
and the Rebellion, the people are all patriots 
or all traitors — yet in an exact, literal, and 
definite sense, it is wholly deceptive, delu- 
sive and false — an ad captandum proposition, 
adapted to the loose purposes of politics, but 
dangerous and inadmissible for all judicial 
purposes. Honest differences of opinion, 
based on high and unselfish considerations of 
the public weal, furnish no grounds for such 
a classification of our citizens. Whoever 
assumes to himself, or to his class, all the pat- 
riotism and loyalty of the country on no bet- 
ter grounds than some abstract theories of 
politics, is a sad victim of self-delusion ; and 
whoever pronounces the guilt of a political 
opponent on such grounds, wanders in the 
maze and twilight of lost principles and for- 
saken landmarks. 

In addressing myself, therefore, to gentl«- 

224 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



225 



men who are not only jealous of their per- 
sonal honor and judicial rectitude, but the 
sworn champions of the National cause, and 
zealous for the perpetuity of the Government, 
I feel all the more confident in urging certain 
great principles of English and American jur- 
isprudence, not only essential to the safety of 
our clients, but absolutely necessary to the 
establishment and existence of that Govern- 
ment whose integrity they are accused of 
having conspired against. 

Before attempting to analyze the testimony, 
I beg permission to offer some observations on 
the character and essential nature of this 
secret organization, called the "American 
Knights," or " Sons of Liberty." I am per- 
suaded that most of the points that I shall see 
proper to make have not escaped, in the pro- 
gress of the cause, the scrutiny of any mem- 
ber of this Court. AVhat is the original, true 
character of the order, as fixed by the printed 
work of the order, and as understood by the 
honest masses of its members, when divested 
of all extraneous and local absurdities with 
which ignorance and passion have invested it 
on the one hand, and of the meditated crimes 
with which ambition and disloyalty in a few 
military leaders have blasted it on the other? 
After the question of jurisdiction, there is no 
other of such special gravity, because upon 
its solution may depend the guilt or innocence 
of several defendants. Although the first 
charge of the accusation against all the de- 
fendants is based on the assumption that the 
order is. per se, a conspiracy, yet if there were 
nothing but the written work of the order, 
which is fully before the Court, and the un- 
derstanding of the purposes and objects of the 
, order by its members — I hazard nothing in 
saying to this Court, that the charges would 
fall. Or to put the question in a more strik- 
ing shape, permit me to ask, whether an order, 
innocent at first blush, and into which a half 
million of men have innocently gone, and 
from whom all knowledge of an evil purpose 
is studiously withheld, and confined to the 
breasts of the few, can be a treasonable con- 
spiracy as to any but the guilty few? The 
intelligence of the whole world will answer 
no! So must this Court, in justice to itself. I 
do not speak of the mummery of its inductions, 
the blasphemy of its invocations, nor the 
solemn mockery of its charges, but of the 
obligations assumed by its initiates, and the 
lessons in the three Temple Degrees. It is 
with unwavering confidence that I invite the 
scrutiny of each member of this Court to the 
obligations and the lessons of the order in In- 
diana, as found in the printed works adduced 
by the Government and now before the Court. 
I appeal from that premature judgment of a 
partisan press, fulminated in the blindness 
r.nd fury of a political campaign, to the calm, 
unimpassioned judgment of honorable, dis- 
criminating and critical minds — nay, I might 
even appeal to the ignorance and prejudice of 
zealots and fanatics for a triumphant vindica- 
tion of the printed obligations and lessons of 
this order, from all charges of conspiracy, dis- 
loyalty, or treason — and as Ichallenge English 
and American judicial history, civil and mili- 

15 



tary, barbarous and civilized, for a precedent 
to justify such a forced, unnatural interpreta- 
tion, to make constructive conspiracy and 
treason from a printed work which inculcates 
nothing worse than bad politics — as I chal- 
lenge the liberal and enlightened spirit of this 
age of toleration in politics and religion, to 
find cause of treasonable accusation against 
these defendants, in the rituals and printed 
work of the order, without a shameless aban- 
donment of the cause of free thought, speech, 
and press, and a return to a gloomy and fero- 
cious period, when to hate was to accuse, and 
to accuse was to convict — so I challenge the 
judicial records of our own wise and benefi- 
cent Government, whose tribunals administer 
her laws according to established rules and 
forms, and in the spirit of magnanimity, 
mercy, and justice, to furnish an example of 
such obligations, such lessons, and such a 
secret association being held, per se, a treason- 
able conspiracy. The Vestibule, or Neophyte 
lessons and obligations avow nothing but the 
most common-place platitudes, in morals and 
politics, while the obligations and lessous of 
the Temple Degrees are but an embodiment 
and amplification of the Virginia and Ken- 
tucky Resolutions of 1798-9, to which the 
Democratic statesmen and masses have been 
committed by periodical conventions, from the 
days of Jefferson and Madison to the present 
hour — all parties, in fact, have at times sub- 
scribed to the orthodoxy of these Resolutions, 
with qualifications of interpretation. AVhat 
is the true interpretation of these Resolutions 
can not be gathered from the lepositories of 
angry debate, but is now undergoing a bloody 
and final solution by the arbitrament of the 
sword. I have no hesitation in saying that 
the construction of these Resolutions, which 
is apparently maintained by the ovder, is 
erroneous and mischievous, and that it has 
been in the baleful light of a less equivocal 
construction, that Southern aristocracy and 
Southern ambition have traveled, by a few 
short steps, from the base of a mere logical 
abstraction to a practical assertion of peacea- 
ble State secession, and finally to an armed 
struggle for Confederate independence and 
the overthrow of Federal authority, and pos- 
sibly the overthrow of Republican liberty 
itself. With these fruits before me, I can not 
ask this Court to indorse State sovereignty 
in the sense of this mischievous interpreta- 
tion — but I do for myself entreat, and for my 
clients demand of the Court, that they shall 
not be adjudged conspirators and traitors 
for holding an admitted abstract heresy in 
religion, politics, or constitutional law, be- 
cause the precedent would be more perni- 
cious and dangerous than the heresy — for the 
standard of orthodoxy and the oracles of 
death, which revolution throws into the places 
of power to-day, may tremble and quiver as 
the reed, and be M'ashed away along with their 
red calendar of doomed victims, by the revo- 
lutionary move of to-morrow. What I ask, 
in a word, is, that these defendants shall 
not be hunted as felons for pledging their 
faith to abstract doctrines, which, for sev- 
enty-five years, have furnished tne press, the 



226 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLrS. 



legislative halls, the court, the colleges, the 
pulpits, with a profound theme of legitimate 
debate. It never has been, and never can be, 
the subject of governmental interference this 
Bide of the point vchere absolutism begins and 
liberty ends. This Court will not forget that 
the National Democratic Convention that con- 
vened in Cincinnati, in 1856, indorsed as a 
cardinal article of their creed the Resolutions 
of 1798-9 — but in that undefined sense which 
committed the party to no given construc- 
tion — still I never heard that the party was 
thereby committed to the cause of treason and 
rebellion. Some years ago, the advocates of 
Stale rights, in the worst sense of these Reso- 
lutions, held State rights conventions at 
Nashville and Charleston — the country was 
generally shocked at the sentiments they 
ultered, but they were not met by indictment, 
but by argument and rebuke. Startling 
utterances came from the Buffalo, Cleveland, 
and Boston convocations of anti-slavery 
Radicals — they were not answered by arrest, 
nor punished by bastiles. Societies were 
formed to promote the growth and dissemina- 
tion of what conservatism pronounced rank 
heresy, fraught with discord and death ; yet 
these agitators were never supposed to be 
amenable to the law of conspiracy and trea- 
son. But one political revolution after 
another has sanctified their doctrines, and 
their advocates now hold the power, dispense 
the honors, and move the armies of this great, 
but distracted country. Once their princi- 
ples were condemned, but not contraband — 
they were proscribed, but not prosecuted. 
Give these defendants the benefit of the inhei-- 
ent, inalienable Anglo-American privilege of 
entertaining and promulgating odious doc- 
trines at war with the supposed highest inter- 
ests of the Church and State — let them enter- 
tain in secret, or proclaim in public, the Reso- 
lutions of 1798-9, and they will not be guilty 
of any crime, however you may differ with 
them on the doctrinal question, as I freely 
confess that I do. 

This brings me to propound this question: 
whether, if the revelations published by Gen- 
eral Carrington in a newspaper, last summer, 
constituted the sum of knowledge of this order, 
and none of the aims, plots, schemes and con- 
spiracies with which the evidence connects 
Dodd and others, had been divulged — whether, 
I say, there is a member of this Court — 
whether the Judge Advocate would have sup- 
posed any conspiracy or treason lurked in 
the printed work of the order? The sponta- 
neous answer to this question that rises to 
every tongue, sweeps away every vestige of 
accusation based on the theory that this order 
is, per se, a conspiracy. There are several le- 
gal consequences hinging on the solution of 
this question. If the order is a conspiracy 
per se, then not only the defendants, but all the 
members, from Mr. Vallandigham down, are 
conspirators, and each is affected by, and re- 
sponsible for, every act and declaration of the 
other done in furtherance of the common de- 
sign — for this is the law of conspiracy. Now, 
what is the "common design" of the order? 
Whether we go to the written work of the or- 



der, or to the teachings and understanding ot 
its members, we find the " common design " 
to be principally the success of the Demo- 
cratic party, or at least the overthrow of the 
party in power, through the instrumentality 
of the ballot-box, and contingently to defend 
that ballot-box, and public and personal lib- 
erty from assault. No other purpose than to 
make a doctrinal issue with the party in 
power, is patent upon the face of the written 
work of the order; and no other purpose 
than to defend the ballot-box, and to shield 
and protect personal and public liberty, can 
be deduced from the reliable evidence in this 
case, and that, too, as a measure of defense 
against the supposed designs of another se- 
cret order, known as the "Loyal League," 
which was supposed to entertain views and 
purposes inimical to the general freedom of 
speech, press, and ballot. T can not conceive 
of any legitimate line of defense of either of 
these orders. Without approving or apolo- 
gizing for either of them, I can readily see, 
and frankly admit, how a fanatical credulity, 
hightened by ignoi'ant agitators and cunning 
imposters, can believe foul schemes of each 
other, and rush into these dens of political 
leprosy for mutual protection, and arm them- 
selves against the phantoms of their own de- 
luded imaginations. Yet the masses of both 
of these orders are law-abiding and patriotic, 
but open to the designs of wicked and ambi- 
tious men. If you will go to the rebel districts, 
you will find Free Masons and Odd Fellows 
among the chief conspirators that put this 
rebellion on foot, yet you can not arraign 
those orders in the North as disloyal and 
treasonable, because a large number of them 
raised the arm of rebellion against the Gov- 
ernment. I regard it as one of the most 
melancholy marks of the disease of the times, 
that so many, otherwise estimable and sensible 
men, should voluntarily seek so miserable a 
refuge as the "Sons of Liberty," as a fortress 
for offensive or defensive purposes — since, 
born of delusion, it could only end in defeat, 
ignominy and shame; and whilst its ruin is 
hailed with general satisfaction, neither the 
bitterest sneers that can be uttered against its 
blackened memory, nor the most obsequious 
homage that adulation can pay to power, 
can convert its faults and its follies into 
crimes. It seems to nie if the Judge Advocate 
had any confidence in the order being treas- 
onable per se, he would not have procured the 
additional evidence of extrinsic facts, at the 
price of the liberation of Harrison, Bingham, 
Heffren and Wilson. The truth is, the coin- 
mon intelligence of the country revolt at the 
assumption that the members of this order are 
all traitors. The traitors in this order were 
embraced in a very small compass, and it is a 
noteworthy fact, that the villainous scheme 
of the few was first challenged, denounced and 
crushed by third degree members of the or- 
der; whilst the Stidgers, under the auspices 
of the Government ofiBcials, were extending 
the order, and urging treason to its culmina- 
tion. The fact that a half dozen, or a dozen, 
restless and corrupt leaders of this order, con- 
ceived a wicked and treasonable plot, no more 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



227 



implicates the order than if such leaders had 
robbed a bank or burnt a church. All who 
participate in the robbery or arson are guilty, 
and if perpetrated in pursuance of a common 
design, the acts and declarations of each are 
good against the others, if charged with con- 
spiracy, but to charge the whole order with 
what one or more said and did, in regard to 
the robbery or arson, would be a monstrous 
perversion of, and a lasting reproach to, the 
law, and the shadow of a military commis- 
sion would become a frightful specter at ev- 
ery fireside in the land. By this illustration, 
I aim to demonstrate the obvious distinction 
and difference between conspiracy and treason 
by relation and construction, and that which 
is brought home to a party by proof of guilty 
knowledge, and actual participation. I shall 
not nicely discriminate the various shades of 
guilt or innocence, which might attach to 
membership in each degree of this order, for 
in the abstract theory of a conspiracy ^er se, 
the mystified, unsophisticated neophyte is, by 
construction, as guilty as the chief culprit, 
who bought arms to levy war; who received 
the gold of the enemy, to lavish in the work 
of hostility to the Government; or who en- 
tered into schemes with wicked, malignant and 
rapacious men, to plot against the Government, 
and to deliver up to the devouring flames of 
civil war the peace, the property, the liberties, 
and the lives of a betrayed people. No one 
with his moral and natural sense not wholly 
blunted by long indulgence in the gluttonous 
demands of a partisan appetite, can accept 
the doctrine. I confess that I hear the propo- 
sition advanced with horror, and I tremble for 
my clients in the presence of an imminent 
danger, which threatens to confound all dis- 
tinctions, and expose those who should only be 
branded with absurdity and folly, to the pen- 
alties of wicked, atrocious, flagitious treason. 
I presume it has not escaped the Court, that 
the formal accusation against the defendants 
embraces five charges, with as many specifica- 
tions under each charge. The first charge is 
conspiracy against the Government of the 
United States — the second is a charge of treason, 
in affording aid and comfort to rebels against 
the authority of the United States — the third 
charge is for " inciting insurrection " — the 
fourth charge is for " disloyal practices " — and 
the fifth chviYgQ is for "violation of the laws 
of war." I am at a great loss to divine under 
which of these charges a conviction will be 
claimed by the learned Judge Advocate. If I 
were not already under many obligations for 
his numerous acts of courtesy and kindness 
during these protracted trials, I should have 
so far presumed upon his frankness and fair- 
ness, as to ask that information in advance, 
but I am left to conjecture. Is the defendant 
Humphreys guilty of conspiracy under the 
first charge and first three specifications? If 
80, it is solely by force of membership in an 
order, which is a conspiracy per se, for the first 
three specifications proceed upon that theory. 
I have elsewhere argued that the written work 
of the order may contain bad politics, but cer- 
tainly violates no law — human or divine — 
civil or military. If a mere connection with 



the order does not make him a conspira- 
tor, then where is the afBrmative, positive, 
extrinsic evidence of conspiracy against him 
under the fourth specification of charge first? 
I answer, there is none. Is he guilty under 
charge second, of treason, by affording aid and 
comfort to rebels? Pretermitting all dis- 
cussion and opinion, whether the giving of 
aid and comfort to domestic enemies or rebels 
can, in any event, constitute treason, I sub- 
mit, without further debate, and in a spirit of 
exultation, that there is not a shadow of evi- 
dence to sustain the specifications under this 
charge, except on the very complicated, 
strained and visionary hypothesis, that the 
order is a treasonable conspiracy, and that 
Humphreys is chargeable, by a fiction of law, 
with all that every member has said or done, 
within two years past, however foreign to the 
avowed purposes of the order. The ghost of 
Jeffreys, in his star chamber, surrounded by 
the shades of his murdered victims, might hail, 
with delight, the revival in America of the 
long lost legal fiction, if constructive treason — 
if this ingenious, refined, cruel and fearful 
legal, military sophism is to obtain. Let 
the shades of the wronged and ruined men of 
the past come forth from their sepulchers, and 
protest against its revival in this land and 
age! Again, is Mr. Humphreys amenable to 
charge third, for "inciting insurrection?" 
The first specification lays the offense to con- 
sist in arming a portion of the citizens of the 
United States, through the Order of the Sons 
of Liberty, against the authority of the United 
States. Where is the evidence to sustain this 
against Humphreys? All attempts to prove, 
by credible witnesses, that the order, as such, 
armed itself against the United States, sig- 
nally failed. As citizens of the United 
States they were invested, as by charter, of 
the indefeasible right to be armed, for pur- 
poses of defense. Mr. Erskine, on the trial 
of Thomas Hardy for treason, remarks, that 
the preamble to the English Bill of Rights 
enumerated the offenses of King James the 
Second ; amongst the chief of which was, his 
causing his subjects to be disarmed; and then 
our ancestors claim this violated right as their 
indefeasible inheritance. "Let us, therefore, 
be cautious how we rush to the conclusion, 
that men are plotting treason against the King, 
because they are asserting a right, the viola- 
tion of which has been adjudged against a 
King, to be treason against the people; and 
let us not suppose that English subjects are a 
banditti, for preparing to defend their lib- 
erties." 

The second specification of the same charge 
is based on supposed incendiary speeches and 
seditious writings. And how much of this is 
Humphreys guilty of? It is in evidence, that 
he made two or three public speeches, always 
exhorting the people to loyalty, obedience and 
law; and generally at the expense of his 
popularity and influence among his ultra 
friends. Some say that he also criticised, with 
freedom, the policy of the Administration. Let 
the minions and parasites of power, and the 
sycophants of titled authority in other coun- 
tries, swallow their speech and stifle their 



228 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



opinions, but I ■would not have this Court 
think so meanly of Mr. Humphreys, as to sup- 
pose he could so divest himself of all man- 
hood as to do it — or that the standard of free 
thought and speech had fallen so low, as to 
call from me an apology to this Court, for the 
audacity of Mr. Humphreys. On the question 
of free thought and speech, the Court will al- 
low me to borrow the following eloquent ex- 
tract from the great AVebster: 

"Important as I deem it to discuss, on all 
proper occasions, the policy of the measures 
at present pursued, it is still more important 
to maintain the right of such discussion, in its 
full and just extent. Sentiments lately sprung 
up, and now growing fashionable, make it nec- 
essary to be explicit on this point. The more 
I perceive a disposition to check the freedom 
of inquiry, by extravagant and unconstitu- 
tional pretenses, the firmer shall be the tone in 
which I shall assert, and the freer the manner 
in which I shall exercise it. It is the ancient 
and undoubted prerogative of this people to 
canvass public measures, and the merits of 
public men. It is a 'home-bred' right, a 
fireside privilege. It hath ever been enjoyed 
in every house, cottage, and cabin in the na- 
tion. It is not to be drawn into controversy. 
It is as undoubted as the right of breathing 
the air, or walking on the earth. Belonging 
to private life as a right, it belongs to public 
life as a duty; and it is the last duty which 
those whose representative I am, shall find me 
to abandon. Aiming at all times to be cour- 
teous and temperate in its use, except when 
the right itself shall' be questioned, I shall 
place myself on the extreme boundary of my 
right, and bid defiance to any arm that would 
move me from my ground. This high constitu- 
tional privilege I shall defend and exercise 
within this House, and without this House, and 
in all places; in time of peace, and at all times. 
Living, I shall assert it, and should I leave no 
othcrinheritancetomy children, by the blessing 
of God, I will leave them the inheritance of free 
principles, and the example of a manly, inde- 
pendent and constitutional defense of them." 

In weighing the seditious and insurrection- 
ary character of speech in this country, re- 
gard must be had to the habits of our people, 
and the untrammeled indulgence of the right, 
at all times and places, and upon all subjects, 
by all parties, sects and associations. Who 
shall say, that one who has not only indulged 
the riglit, in the temperate support of his own 
opinions, but when he has heard the boister- 
ous waves of popular excitement dashing 
against the side of the ship of State, at the 
hazard of alienation from friends, has allayed 
their strife and hushed their murmurs, should 
be dragged to the bar of public shame, and 
public justice, and punished for the enormous 
crime of inciting insurrection, against a Gov- 
ernment whose excellence he was taught to 
lisp in his cradle, to love in his youth, and to 
defend in his manhood? What, in point of 
law, gives a seditious and insurrectionary 
character to speech? Such speech is always 
composed of two elements, viz.: 1. Of words 
of seditious import, addressed to the evil pas- 
sious of disafi"ected men. 2. An insurrection- 



ary intent, to foment civil commotion, and 
precipitate revolt against the Government. 
Who can escape prosecution, after the convic- 
tion of Humphreys, except the slavish echoes 
of a shifting partisan orthodoxy? It were 
better that the stroke of pestilence, the wail 
of famine, and the earthquake of revolution, 
should all visit the country, than to be stricken 
with a paralysis of such abject, sottish sla- 
very. 

The fourth charge accuses him and others 
of "disloyal practices," in six specifications, 
in this, viz.: 1. In advising others to resist 
the draft. 2. Arming the secret order to re- 
sist the draft. 3 and 4. The same specifica- 
tions laid at difi'erent dates. 5. In holding 
military ofiices in the order of the " Sons of 
Liberty." I respectfully submit, to the recol- 
lection of this Court, that there is not a scin- 
tilla of evidence to countenance any of these 
specifications. On all occasions, he is shown 
to have exhorted submission to the draft, and 
obedience to law. 

Under charge fifth, for a " violation of the 
laws of war," I am at a loss to know what to 
say. The very sound of the charge is strange, 
and the proposition itself is unfathomable, by 
the citizens of a State that has remained firm 
in her integrity to the cause of the Union — 
lavish in her sacrifices of life, labor, and 
money, for the National cause — but, perhaps, 
it is possible, in the anomalous condition of 
our National afi"airs, for a citizen adhering to 
the cause of the Federal Government — engaged 
in the peaceful avocations of life — in no way 
connected with the army, nor amenable to mil- 
itary or martial law — to subject himself to the 
laws of war, which only prevail inside of mil- 
itary lines, in the enemy's country, and in 
the presence of belligerent armies. But "I con- 
fess that I do not believe that the laws of war 
prevail in Indiana. The first specification 
under this charge, lays the guilt of Hum- 
phreys, with others, in attempting to introduce 
into the loyal States the enemies of the United 
States. Will it not be a suflScient answer to 
this specification to ask, what witness con- 
nects Mr. Humphreys with anj'^ such attempt, 
actually or constructively ? Whatever force 
it may have as against others, it is certainly 
gratuitous and without warrant in the evi- 
dence against Humphreys. The second speci- 
fication under this charge lays the oflense to 
consist of organizing and extending a certain 
unlawful secret order, known as the " Sons of 
Liberty," or "American Knights." It is not 
in evidence that Mr. Humphreys ever organ- 
ized, or extended, this order, but it is in evi- 
dence, that he bui-nt the records, and dis- 
banded the Temple to which he belonged, as 
early as last March. But, while there is no 
evidence connecting Humphreys with this 
enterprise, there is ample evidence that Gen- 
eral Carrington, through his confidential 
agent, Mr. Stidger, engaged extensively in the 
work in Kentucky. This ought to be accepted 
as conclusive, that there was notliing wrong 
in the order per se. To fix responsibility on 
Humphreys, under this, as well as most of 
the other charges, you must first find that this 
order was a treasonable conspiracy, and tlat 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



229 



its boasted half million of members were all 
conspirators and traitors — and secondly, that 
the organization and extension of the order 
was in pursuance of the "common design" 
of the conspirators and traitors — and thirdly, 
that every thing that might be said or done, 
at any time, or under any circumstances, in 
any part of the United States, by any one of 
the half million of members, aifects, with guilty 
knowledge and plenary responsibility, every 
other member. Logic is a mighty engine, and 
the human brain fertile in resources, but to 
compass the demonstration of these proposi- 
tions, must be the work, not of dialectics, but 
of the sword that cut the Gordian knot. I 
have now gone through the charges and speci- 
fications, as they relate to Mr. Humphreys, 
with such observations as they necessarily 
suggested, to one anxious for the fate of his 
client. These observations having an equal 
application to the charges as they relate to 
the case of Colonel Bowles, I shall not recur 
to them again. 

This brings me to a consideration of the 
measure of guilt, as indicated by the evi- 
dence, first, of Andrew Humphreys, and, sec- 
ondly, of William A. Bowles. 

The term, "common design," applied to this 
order, is suggestive of all that is absurd, in- 
congruous, ridiculous, inconsistent, contra- 
dictory, and stupid. "Multifarious design" 
is the only term that adequately expresses the 
inherent quality of the order. If it had any 
" common design," it has not been made 
manifest, either by the written work of the 
order, or the testimony of its members, or both 
together. The written work binds the order 
in abstract faith to the Resolutions of 1798-9, 
as the embodiment of the doctrine of State 
rights — the educated, intelligent members of 
the order swear that it was simply a political 
organization, to advance the interests of a 
party, as they understood it — while others 
understood it to look to defense at the polls 
against violence — while the ignorant and 
superstitious witnesses, from the unenlight- 
ened localities, who left the order in a fit of 
delirium tremens, and came upon the witness 
stand under a subdued terror of nightmare, 
swear that they were actually sworn into the 
service of Jefferson Davis — though they did 
not, I believe, see either his claws or his horns. 
They also swear to what the Peter Noodles of 
the ordei" said about things in general, at the 
meetings of the township temples — whilst the 
detectives and spies have a medley of all these, 
which they offer for our credence. The Court 
must see that this chameleon character of the 
order grows partly out of the difl'erence in 
point of intelligence and opportunity of the 
members, and jjartly out of the confusion of 
the old orders of the Circle of Honor, Knights 
of the Golden Circle, the Circle of the Mighty 
Host, and the like — and partly out of the 
locality, people, and the teachers, in the order. 
Harrison, Bingham and Heffren, for example, 
understood it to be purely political as to the 
masses, and also military, as lo a few, as they 
finally learned. I shall not stultify myself 
by denying this military feature in the order, 
nor that a few desperate men of that branch, 



in and out of this State, sought to precipitate 
the order into revolution ; but I do deny the 
complicity of Humphreys, and a great many 
others, who had been improvidently named to 
some military office. If Humphreys was 
guilty of complicity in the schemes of Dodd, 
Bullitt, and other military chiefs, why is it 
that he was not running up and down the 
country, attending Grand and Supreme Coun- 
cils ? Why was he not at Chicago at some of 
their meetings? Why was he not at the meet^ 
ing of the Supreme Council, in New York, last 
February? Why was he not dangling at the 
heels of Vallandigham at Hamilton? Why 
did he not respond to Dodd's summons to 
attend the military consultation in this city ? 
And how did he escape, and why did not he 
attract the attention of spies and detectives? 
For who does not know that the system of 
espionage in this State, would have marked 
him for the snares of duplicity and treachery? 
And yet he escaped. His innocence was his 
protection, and his character his shield. 

Andrew Humphreys, when called on to an- 
swer these charges, "was taken from the body 
of a loyal, but, in some respects, misguided 
people. He occupied a proud eminence, not in 
place and authority, but in the confidence and 
hearts of all who knew him. Impulsive in his 
nature, free in his thoughts, sincere in his at- 
tachments, confiding in his intercourse, firm 
in his convictions, and brave and generous in 
all his relations, imbued with hereditary jeal- 
ousy of arbitrary power, he was the favorite 
companion of his political friends; and who- 
ever sought his counsels in the interest of 
peace and law, ever found him faithful to the 
highest obligations of citizenship. The honest 
people with whom he lived, and who knew his 
worst faults, of partisan zeal, and who knew 
all of criminality that this trial has devel- 
oped against him, and no one supposed him 
guilty of any one of the gross and enormous 
crimes with whicli he stands accused on the 
records of this Court. Clothed with conscious 
innocence, and with the kind wishes and bless- 
ings of those people, of all parties, he stands 
to-day before this Court without shame and 
without fear — without shame, because he has 
neither said nor done any thing at war with 
the true principles of religion, of liberty, of 
loyalty, or law — without fear, because he be- 
lieves his fate is in the hands of those whose 
abilities and dispositions are equal to the task 
of his vindication — that the goodness of your 
justice is equal to the power of your trust. 
That Mr. Humphreys is free from fault, is more 
than I shall urge, but this Court was not 
clothed with power and authority to punish 
the social or political faults of m€n; and even 
if it were, the temporary reproach which this 
trial has conferred upon him, is penalty 
enough for his brief connection with an or- 
der whose claims upon his fealty and allegi- 
ance he indignantly shook off in March, 1864, 
and as a testimony against it, deliberately 
burned its records and washed his hands of 
all responsibility for its existence; and if 
others had done as well — if detectives had not 
given it Government aid — the whole fabric of 
the order would have tumbled into ruins long 



230 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



before it did. It is one thing, if it pleases "the 
Court, for a party man, in a sanguine, warm, 
and even impassioned manner, without conceal- 
ment and without apology, to plead against the 
measures of Administration and the abuses of 
power, looking all the while to the public 
good — this may be a partisan fault, but no 
crime ; and quite another thing for a party 
man, when our Government is in the throes of 
a life and death struggle, to play the agitator, 
and; in the name of patriotism, to utter ac- 
cents of despair; appeal to the selfish, bad pas- 
sions of men; sow the seeds, by unworthy 
speech, of demoralization in our armies; 
thwart and paralyze the honest efforts of Gov- 
ernment to maintain its authority, by cal- 
umny and denunciation — this would be a 
grievous abuse of the liberty of speech, but 
no crime of treason — and still another and a 
wickeder thing, to go howling about the coun- 
try, and in flaming speech and mock patri- 
otism, arraigning the public authorities as 
usurpers, tyrants and despots, poisoning the 
public heart against those in authority, clam- 
oring for peace in the face of embattled armies, 
fanning the embers of discord and revolt, 
kindling, by incendiary appeal, the fires of in- 
surrection and revolution, and finally identi- 
fying himself with the cause of rebels and 
traitors, and lending himself, in thought and 
deed, by night and by day, in secret and in 
public, giving aid and comfort to the public 
enemy against his own Government — this is 
conspiracy {ind treason — it has all thedisloyallin- 
eaments of treasonable deformity, and neither 
eloquence nor art, neither painting nor poetry, 
can change it — its office is discord, war and 
misery. The fault first mentioned is common 
to all Americans, and I consign Mr. Hum- 
phreys to the company of that class of men, 
whose whole fault is in ministering conscien- 
tiously and innocently, but perhaps too lav- 
ishly, to the partisan zeal of his friends, but 
this is more than compensated in the ready 
promptitude with which he has always re- 
sponded to the demands of law, order, and au- 
thority, in those frank, earnest exhortations 
to the people, which never failed to allay 
the temper of excited men, and restore the 
supremacy of reason and law. If it please 
this honorable Court to assign him to the sec- 
ond category of offenders, then, I say, a bright 
life, of resolute devotion to the public good, is 
to that extent tarnished and obscured, but not 
stamped with the dark hues of crime, known 
to any established law, civil or military, com- 
mon or martial. Censure, calumniate, revile 
him, if you please, for his mistakes, errors, 
and vicious sentiments, and I shall only find 
less in him to commend, and more to deplore, 
for the less happy position you have assigned; 
but, gentlemen, in the name of law and jus- 
tice — in the name of that legitimate authority 
of better days, which, I trust, will return to 
us again, when the snowy banner of peace 
shall herald a restored Union, and a fraternal 
people — in the name of that shadow of com- 
punction and retribution which follows the 
havoc of those who rule by passion, and per- 
secute by faith — in the name of those sorrows 
and griefs which a harsh imprisonment has 



added to the wounds of a sensitive and proud 
spirit — in the name of that liberty of opinion 
and speech which, in every country, has been 
the last which the subject has wrested from 
power, as it has always been the first which 
power has wrested from the subject — in the 
name of that little family circle whose memo- 
ries and affections clustered around him in 
his happier days — in the name of that deep 
public interest which the magnitude of these 
trials has evoked, and that scrutiny of his- 
tory which your record will invite — in the 
name, I say, of all these interests, I entreat 
you to make this, your judicial record, as il- 
lustrious for its probity, learning, impartial- 
ity and justice, as your military record can 
be, under the highest gallantry, and the most 
auspicious fortunes of war. 

It would be a useless consumption of time 
to discuss the elements of the third cate- 
gory, in which I concede disloyalty, conspir« 
acy, and treason all abide; and if j-ou can, 
gentlemen, in your consciences, bound by the 
highest obligations of oath and honor, assign 
him to this category of shame, of guilt, of 
punishment, I could only say that the startling 
conviction would be more productive of horror, 
than the turpitude of the crime of which he is 
convicted. Is it an example that is wanted? 
Our people are practically a unit in their al- 
legiance and devotion to the Constitution and 
the Government, and as long as I have a voice 
I will labor to keep them so; but no Govern- 
ment can rule long, by torture and terror, a 
people accustomed to be governed through 
their affections, and while one such example 
might be potent, to weaken the bonds of loy- 
alty, for this latitude and generation, while 
the guiltiest of the accused have made their 
atonement on the witness stand; the liberal- 
ity, the generosity, and the humanity of all 
parties, sexes, and ages, would embalm it iu 
their sorrows, as a melancholy act of vindic- 
tive justice, such as history records only of 
crumbling and expiring dynasties. For this 
rebellion and its horrible consequences to the 
nation, I have but one language and one sen- 
timent, in Court and out, from its commence- 
ment to the present day — and for those of the 
North who withdraw their sympathy and alle- 
giance from the Government, in the hour of 
its trial, in this crisis of its fate, and conspire 
for its overthrow and the success of the rebel 
cause, no matter who administers the Govern- 
ment, or what the policy, I have but one sen- 
tence — for I feel too much interest in the cause 
as a citizen, to prove false as a lawyer — and 
if the law and the evidence demand their 
blood to fertilize the land they betrayed and 
dishonored, I will not murmur. But iu the 
name of this National cause, I claim the right 
to protest against the useless sacrifice of any 
man, however humble, or however heretical 
in his partisan politics, either for the idle pur- 
poses of an example, for the atonement of po- 
litical offenses, or for the propitiation of 
power. 

Now, what is the evidence against Andrew 
Humphreys, that he should be forced through 
the solemn forms of trial? Mr. William M. 
Harrison, a witness for the Government, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



231 



swears that Humphreys was appointed a Ma- 
jor General in the order, at a Council meeting 
at Indianapolis, 10th of September, 1863, and 
was also re-appointed at the February Coun- 
cil, 1864, but was not present at either meet- 
ing, and was never notified of his appoint- 
ment by him, as the Secretary. That Hum- 
phreys never attended more than one State 
Council, and that was the night session of the 
meeting at Indianapolis, in June, 1864. The 
Judge Advocate asked one question in such 
form, as apparently made him say, that Hum- 
phreys was present at the September meeting, 
1863, but he corrected it fully on cross-exam- 
ination. He was not present when the mili- 
tary bill was discussed, or adopted. There is 
no legitimate evidence that he either knew of, 
or ever accepted this appointment. Stidger 
swears that Bowles had something to say 
about Humphreys accepting a brigadier's com- 
mission to stay in the rear. Stidger also pre- 
tends that he saw Humphreys at the Council 
in the day-time, in June, 1864; that he sat be- 
hind him on a seat in the hall, and was referred 
to by one or more speakers — this statement 
was wholly untrue. Heffren swears that 
Humphreys was not present when elected Ma- 
jor General. He also swears that he had an 
interview with Humphreys last spring, at 
the Greencastle Junction, when coming to this 
city — they talked about the order — and Hum- 
phreys said "it would not do. We must de- 
pend on Chicago" — and he said "he was for 
his country, right or wrong" — and "would 
have nothing further to do with the order, and 
advised me to quit it." Thus, the Govern- 
ment's own witness bears faithful testimony 
to Mr. Humphreys' steadfast loyalty. This is 
all the evidence that bears, in any way; on 
his connection with the order — an order on 
which he had set the seal of his condemnation, 
long before Dodd and his wild schemes had 
awakened suspicion any-where. I now invite 
the attention of the Court, while I follow Mr. 
Humphreys to the counties of Sullivan and 
Green, where he has lived for so many years, 
enjoying the confidence, respect, and official 
honors that are always held in reserve, by the 
people, for their true men. It is a source of no 
little pride and gratulation to Mr. Humphreys 
to see that the Government could bring not one 
of his neighbors, not even a personal enemy, 
to swear against him — that lived nearer than 
nine miles — Mr. Elisha Cowgill, the timid 
Provost Marshal, living thirty miles, and Mr. 
Nicholas Cochrane, nine or ten miles, from the 
home of Humphreys. This satisfaction is the 
reward of a well-spent life, in the midst of an 
honest, gallant, high-toned people. All parties 
and classes shrink from pursuing him, and 
stand appalled at the supposed perils of his 
situation. From this proud eminence of moral 
worth, he this day surveys his accusers with 
no narrow sentiments of hate or revenge, but 
with those calm and serene reflections which 
only spring from that honor and magnanim- 
ity, which make large allowance for errors 
and misunderstandings among men. From 
that same eminence he surveys the array of 
his judges, and while he thinks he can read 
his acquittal in the sympathetic expression of 



the Court, he still leans upon you with the same 
anxious confidence which he reposed at the 
beginning of this trial, and will so continue, 
until your final verdict shall wipe away all 
reproach from his character. Mr. Cowgill, 
who lives thirty miles from the accused, comes 
before this Court to say that "about the fourth 
day of June, 1863, I saw Mr. Humphreys 
in Sullivan county, at the head of an army of 
four hundred men." What do the Court think 
of the witness? Do you think him a fair wit- 
ness, in view of the sequel disclosed by other 
witnesses? He says some of the crowd called 
him a " damned Abolition rascal." I think, 
myself, that an army of four hundred men had 
very little to do in uttering such personal in- 
sinuations against so good a man, and I assure 
him, if Humphreys had had the training of 
that army, the offensive charge would never 
have been uttered. The Judge Advocate asks 
him, " What was Humphreys' share in the 
transactions of that day? Did he undertake 
to subdue the mob, or to lead it ?" To which 
this meek an(> exemplary gentleman is com- 
pelled to answer — "Humphreys spoke a sec- 
ond time, and did advise them to go home, 
and mind their own business, and asked me if 
I did not indorse his speech — I said I did." I 
confess, I have had my suspicions of Hum- 
phreys' speech ever since this witness swore 
that he indorsed it — my confidence in the 
speech has been very much shaken. In the 
next breath this witness swears that "Hum- 
phreys did not try to stop the excited crowd, 
in my presence." How is this to be reconciled ? 
Here was a crowd of two hundred excited men, 
which he put down at four h^indred — here was 
Humphreys, who, having been sent for to 
quell the threatened disturbance, had come 
twelve miles — addressed the crowd twice, ex- 
horting them to go home, and keep the peace, 
with the repeated assurance that the Govern- 
ment would do them no harm ; that the sol- 
diers had returned tlie horses, and the crowd 
must disperse — yet, he says, Humphreys did 
nothing in his presence to stop them, although 
the speeches that Humphreys made to the men 
he fully indorsed himself. But the coolest 
piece of imposture, that these fraudulent times 
have witnessed, was the request that he made 
on Humphreys, to tell the crowd that "he (the 
witness) was a gcnileman. and the crowd must 
hear him speak" — and which was only equaled 
by the violent presumption and false charity 
with which Humphreys gave the unconscion- 
able assurance to the crowd. He swore that 
a man by the name of Ussery tried to get 
him drunk, but that he got Ussery drunk — 
this matchless piece of generalship consisted 
in his capacity to drink more strychnine 
whisky than Usse^'y. He says Humphreys 
had a pistol to his side — and, I venture, the 
witness had two or three of them. The Gov- 
ernment, then, makes nothing out of this meet- 
ing, but credit and honor for Humphreys. 
The witnesses for the defense explain the 
origin and character of this meeting, and if 
they show an undue excitement of the people, 
without adequate cause, they, at the same time, 
show a most commendable discharge of duty 
on the part of Humphreys. The Government 



•232 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



next introduced a modest and fair-minded 
man, by the name of Nicholas Cochrane, living 
nine miles away. He heard Mr. Humphreys 
make a speech in Jackson township, Sullivan 
county, on the 5th of September, 1863, at a 
Democratic picnic. His description of the 
speech is in these words: "He criticised the 
Administration tolerably strong — he seemed 
solicitous for peace — to be out of the war — and 
he seemed to think that the Democratic party 
was imposed upon, and ought to stand up to 
their rights — the general run of his speech 
was in opposition to the present Administra- 
tion."' Is there any sedition or treason in 
this? But there were other speeches by other 
gentlemen, and among the rest one by some 
Georgia man, who called himself a rebel. I 
suppose he was not a very dangerous rebel, 
as another witness testifies that he had taken 
the oath of allegiance from the military au- 
thorities, and had been long employed in the 
qtiartermaster's department, in this State — so 
that if any one is responsible for a " rebel " 
being at large, it was not Iflimphreys — nor 
was Humphreys responsible for all who might 
attend a public meeting. This man, other wit- 
nesses say, was not an invited speaker, but 
was called on at the close of the meeting to 
get up that the crowd might see him — and 
then talked to them about five minutes. The 
Judge Advocate was imposed upon when he 
was led to give any consequence to this cir- 
cumstance. He would scorn to throw such 
trash into the scale against the innocence of 
any man. Mr. Humphreys, witness says, 
advised this meeting to disperse, and go home 
in peace. Is there treason, or disloyal prac- 
tice in all this ? Shall the guileless simplicity 
of his character be tortured into hypocrisy, 
and from hypocrisy into crime? This is all 
the evidence of the Government touching 
seditious speeches by the accused. A number 
of witnesses were called for Mr. Humphreys, 
as to character and conduct at home, as a cit- 
izen, but much of their testimony is unimpor- 
tant. They all sustain his unblemished repu- 
tation for morality, honesty, honor, patriot- 
ism and loyalty. Two Republican neighbors, 
among others, indorse him in these respects. 
Mr. Wines had heard him make two or more 
speeches on politics, the draft, and the duty of 
all his neighbors. He reports him as saying : 
"I advise no man to resist the draft, nor in- 
deed any law of Congress, but I advise all to 
be good, law-abiding citizens." At another 
meeting, he heard him say to the people, in a 
upeech, that "Resistance to the Government 
would not do, at all, in any shape or form — 
<lisaster would be sure to overtake them. 
They must remain at home, and submit quiet- 
ly to the laws of the Government." I ask 
again, is this inciting insurrection? This 
witness says tliat Humphreys then made an 
effort to raise money to procure substitutes 
for poor men. Was this a disloyal practice? 
Again, this same witness says that Mr. Hum- 
phreys at another time "exhorted the people 
to obey the laws." 

Mr. Johnson is another witness who gave 
Mr. Humphreys an excellent character for 
loyalty and patriotism in general, but thought, 



on one occasion, he read Washington's Faie- 
well Address, and Jefferson's writings, in sup- 
port of the doctrines of secession; but as we 
were not allowed to prove that hewasmlstaken. 
and as the Judge Advocate claims no affirma- 
tive force for the evidence, we will give it no 
further attention. Mr. Johnson was a Republi- 
can gentleman, of moderate literary accom- 
plishments, and was prone to construe every 
argument against sectional agitation and in fa- 
vor of State rights into a secession argument — 
in this he is, by no means, singular oreccentric, 
for it is a prevailing weakness of the times. 
But in view of all that Humphreys has said, 
under every change of circumstance, and un- 
der the strongest temptations to waver — if 
it were not indelicate — I would like to ask 
each member of the Court, whether he can 
show an escutcheon of loyalty as bright with 
the repeated utterances of fidelity to the Gov- 
ernment, devotion to the Union, obedience to 
law, as Humphreys has registered upon the 
memories of these witnesses, and upon the 
hearts of his neighbors. 

There is one other important fact, with 
which I will refresh the recollection of the 
Court, in favor of Mr. Humphreys. On page 
35 of the Record, of November 17, after some 
discussion, Mr. Wm. Moss, a witness for 
Humphreys, and who was a delegate in at- 
tendance at the Grand Ci uncil, in February, 
when Humphreys was appointed Major Gen- 
eral, swears that he was authorized to convey 
to Mr. Humphreys notice of his appointment — 
in answer to a question, whether Humphreys, 
on being informed of his appointment, re- 
jected or accepted it? His answer was — "I 
know he rejected it." This would seem to be 
conclusive on the question, and ought to with- 
draw that point from all controversy. Mr. 
Moss also heard Humphreys' speech to the peo- 
ple when Mr. Cowgillwas present — heard him 
exhort the people to disperse, and go home and 
keep the peace — that the Government had not, 
and would not, send soldiers out to harass 
them — and they did disperse. Mr. Price tes- 
tifies to the same thing, at the same meeting. 
If Humphreys was a bad man, his neighbors 
would know it — but none appeared against 
him. From Moss' testimony, it appears im- 
possible, from entries in their partnership 
books, late in the evening before, that ho 
should have been at the Council in June last. 

Bear with nie, gentlemen, while I sum up 
the testimony for and against Colonel Bowles. 
I am betraj-ing no trust, when I admit that I 
am oppressed with the weight of the circum- 
stances which throw their dismal shadows 
across his pathway, and shutout some of that 
mellow sunlight which is so essential to 
quicken with gladness the feeble pulse of age. 
An old man, who comes down to us from a 
past generation of heroes and giants, is before 
you, struggling in the toils that accident, mis- 
placed confidence, or foul intrigue has spread 
for his destruction. Such a sight has not 
been witnessed before in this countrj', and 
the pen of history is waiting to record the 
momentous issue made up between him and 
his Government. The moral sinews of a no- 
ble nature sustain him with dignity in tho 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



233 



presence of any peril, and if only tears of 
mercy can win him deliverance, they would 
refuse to flow. The unsuspecting simplicity 
of the old man, has proved a snare to his 
feet, and marked him an easy prey for the 
kites and vultures of society, who, under the 
deceitful guise of curing abuses, and in the 
misapplication of doctrines and maxims, that 
underlie all free States, win, traffic and trade 
in confidence as a merchandise of the market. 
It is only to be regretted, that Colonel Bowles 
has not an abler and more learned counsel to 
give force to those circumstances, that tell but 
too plainly the extent of his wrongs, and to 
erect around him a bulwark of innocence, jus- 
tice and law. I am not about to urge any new 
theory of human responsibility — all that the 
evidence proves, or fairly implies, he accepts, 
and it is with that evidence that I now pro- 
pose to deal. But in this connection, I will 
ask this question, and I ask the Court to dwell 
upon it — it is suggestive of more than it ex- 
presses — does it not stagger human faith, that 
an old man, near seventy years of age — dead 
to all the motives of young ambition — with 
the whole field of human enterprise, by the 
advance of years, contracted around him, 
soon to be narrowed to the compass of the 
grave — no dream of ambition, of wealth, of 
fame, of love, of romance, of chivalry, to 
quicken his limbs, or fire his heart^^should 
voluntarily become the leader, and chief con- 
spirator, in these alleged crimes? Was it 
glory that he sought amid the din of arms ? — 
there was no glory in the debasing plots of 
murder, rapine, insurrection, conflagration, 
and plunder. Was it wealth that he desired? — 
he needed not wealth, for he was surrounded 
by broad acres, and the refinements and ele- 
gancies of life. Was it a morbid political de- 
lusion in favor of the rebel cause? — if so, he 
could have enlisted in that cause four years 
ago, and secured its doubtful honors, while he 
could have saved himself an immense estate 
in the South from confiscation. AVas it a mean, 
low, political popularity at home that he 
sought? No, for he had courted no political 
favor for near twenty years. But why dwell 
in the regions of fancy and speculation, when 
every thread, and every fiber, of the network 
that is woven around him, proclaim, in char- 
acters of living light, that his hospitality has 
been abused — that his open hand, open heart, 
and open house exposed him to the arts and 
wiles of reckless and unscrupulous men ? 

Without attempting to deal with the evidence 
in detail, it will suffice for me to say, that the 
Government's evidence tends to bring Colonel 
Bowles within the charges: 1. Of conspiracy; 
2. Of treason; 3. Of disloyal practices; and 
4. Of violation of the laws of war. The acts 
and aims that implicate him in the one or the 
other of these charges are proved, in the main, 
by the statements and declarations of persons 
more or less connected with the "Sons of Lib- 
erty," but who do not admit that they were 
themselves implicated in any actual or con- 
templated scheme of disloyalty — and whose 
declarations and statements, therefore, can 
implicate no one but themselves — because, not 
being actual conspirators themselves, their 



declarations are inadmissible against others; 
for I maintain that unless the Government can 
bring declarations from actual conspirators 
engaged in a "common design" with the ac- 
cused, they are inadmissible. 

The whole question of the admissibility of 
these declarations of members of the order, 
simply because they are members, is held in 
abeyance by the Court, and is still an open 
one, to abide the antecedent decision of the 
question whether the order is a treasonable 
conspiracy? And unless you hold that it is, 
all these statements affecting Colonel Bowles 
fall to the ground. 

The acts and aims which the evidence tends 
to establish against Colonel Bowles, consist, as 
will be claimed: 1. In his membership in an 
unlawful secret society; 2. The arming of 
men to resist the authority of the Govern- 
ment; 3. Conspiring to put on foot an insur- 
rection in aid of the rebellion, by seizing the 
arsenals in several of the States, liberating 
rebel prisoners, deposing the Governor of this 
State, and striking for a North-western Con- 
federacy, or an alliance with the Southern; 

4. Accepting and acting under a commission 
of Major-General from the "Sons of Liberty." 

5. Attending the conclaves at Chicago, and 
mingling in the councils of traitors, and divid- 
ing large sums of rebel money with the military 
heads of the order; 6. By complicity with 
Booking and others in his Greek-fire pre- 
parations to destroy Government property; 
7. Having intercourse and correspondence 
with rebels, through one Dickerson, of Balti- 
more; 8. The distribution of money to the 
order to buy arms to resist the Government. 
This is a huge array of atrocities, and if the 
half has been proved by legitimate testimony, 
I should have more pity for his fate than hope 
for his deliverance. It would not be an im- 
possible nor an improbable thing for a man 
like Colonel Bowles to follow a great way, 
blindly, the artful leaders in such a scheme, 
without comprehending or suspecting its bear- 
ings, because all was being done in the name 
of the order, whose legitimate objects he knew 
were lawful. This, I claim, is true of Colonel 
Bowles. It was somewhat different with Mr. 
Humphreys in this respect. He suspected the 
order as early as March, 1864, and when Mr. 
Moss conveyed to him the intelligence of his 
appointment as Major-General, together with 
information of the action of the Council at 
Indianapolis on the military bill, he at once 
denounced and renounced the order, and re- 
jected the commission, and gave as a reason 
that he was not aware before that there was 
any such military feature connected with the 
order. He then sent for the records and papers 
of the temple in his township, burnt them in 
the stove, and washed his hands of the order. 
See testimony of Wm. Moss, November 17, 1864. 

Was he a member of the order? Perhaps 
he was; and yet the evidence shows that he 
either did not know, or did not care for the 
obligations of secrecy, as he seems to have 
talked to every body with great freedom upon 
the subject. But even that membership, I 
have shown, amounts to neither of the ofleuses 
charged. 



234 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



To constitute conspiracy, there must be con- 
cert, concurrence, agreement, assent, by all 
the parties, with a knowledge and approval of 
the common design. AVhere there is no com- 
mon design, there can be no conspiracy, and 
where there is a common design, its object 
must be unlawful. After the escape of Dodd, 
the absence of AValker, the arrest of Bullitt 
and Barrett, and the discharge of Harrison, 
Bingham, Heffren and Wilson, the banishment 
of Kalfus and others, and the imprisonment 
of Yeakle and Booking, Bowles becomes the 
most prominent, as he is the worst seduced, 
betrayed and injured figure in the foreground. 
It will, no doubt, be argued by the learned 
Judge Advocate, that Bowles was a prime in- 
stigator of treason. All the testimony that 
makes him a traitor, tends to show that he 
was seduced and betrayed into a false posi- 
tion by the wily intrigues of designing men. 
Bowles was looking at one object, and his be- 
trayers at another. They meant treason and 
revolution. He was dazzled by the glittering 
bauble of compromise, which he hoped to in- 
augurate by some kind of associated action. 
Is this not a more rational explanation of his 
conduct, than the harsh and incredible one 
offered by the Government? He was always 
as simple about it as a child, and is to this 
day, for he can see no crime in a compromise, 
nor in the means to accomplish it; and this 
was all the use he had for the order. Mr. 
Harrison knew Bowles simply as a member of 
the Council, and Major-General by appoint- 
ment. J3ingham only knew him as such. 
Dodd insisted on making him a Major-Gen- 
eral. He refused and protested until the law 
was modified to suit his views. He was a man 
of considerable fortune. The Bullitts, the 
Dodds and the Barretts were poor and needy. 
It seems to have been a matter of indifference 
with them, and their tools, whether they lined 
their pockets with rebel money, or money 
from the coffers of Bowles. Stidgcr was sent, 
time and again, by Bullitt to Bowles, to mis- 
lead and betray him. Bowles always received 
him without asking or caring whether he was 
a member of the order or not. What motive 
had Bullitt and Stidger, but to mislead him 
into complicity with treason? Bowles was 
passive — they were active. They even sought 
to commit the old man to a sanction of the 
assassination of Coffin. Bowles knew CoiSn, 
and would not credit the imputation upon his 
fidelitj', but finally promised to put men on 
his track, to watch him. 

Behold this simple old man, beset by Coffin 
and Stidger, two Government spies, and also 
by Dodd, Bullitt and others, of the revolution- 
ary type! Men less credulous and infirm 
than 13owles would have fallen before such a 
combined assault. Dodd and his Kentucky 
revolutionary schemers could not rest until 
they forced a major-general's commission on 
Bowles; and to do which, Dodd caused the 
county of Orange to be thrown into another 
district, to make him eligible. And now, that 
one set of them have got him on trial for his 
life, another set — Heffren and Wilson — who 
purchased their safety at the price of dis- 
honor, broken faith and violated pledges, by 



exchanging the dock for the confessional — 
the soldier's home for the witness stand — and 
swearing Bowles into deep trouble, and them- 
selves out; now scuttle the ship, and leave old 
age, blighted hope and ruined fortune to buffet 
the waves alone. Heffren's testimony was 
like the mountain avalanche of snow — small in 
the beginning, but gathering size and mo- 
mentum as it rolls, until it sweeps down in its 
course every obstruction in its path. Heffren's 
testimony swept down, not only Bowles, but 
Dodd, Wilson and Walker, and buried himself, 
finally, in the common ruin. Wilson, not to 
be outdone by Heffren, comes upon the witness 
stand, redolent with the savory odors of the 
Chicago conclave, with forty dollars of rebel 
money in his pocket, obtained from Barrett as 
mileage, and a thousand dollars, obtained 
from Bowles, to buy arms, and strikes Bowles 
and Heffren "lick about." For history not to 
know and record the transcendent virtues of 
these two defunct witnesses, were to rob pos- 
terity of half of its inheritance. History has 
already appropriated them. 

I can understand and appreciate how an 
honest man may join a treasonable order un- 
wittingly, and on discovering its true char- 
acter, abandon and expose it, in the interest 
of law and public liberty — I can understand 
also the reasoning and casuistry by which a 
detective reconciles his deceptions and bad 
faith with his paramount duty to society and 
stable Government — but I confess nothing but 
loathing and detestation for one who is parti- 
ceps criminis, and so continues, until the trial 
proves his guilt, and then virtuously con- 
cludes to save himself, and ruin his accom- 
plices. 

It is proper that I should say, in behalf of 
all the accused, that there is an inconvenient 
redundancy of testimony, given on this trial, 
which is not evidence, for the reason that it 
does not support any issue — that it is mere 
political scandal. I allude to it simply that 
the Court may detect it, and dismiss it from 
consideration. There is another item of testi- 
mony affecting Colonel Bowles that I will 
allude to. Hefi'ren swears that he understood 
from Wilson, that Dodd and AValker received 
one hundred thousand dollars, each, of rebel 
money, and that Bowles got his share. This 
is a great wrong to Colonel Bowles, if false, 
yet the Government did not ask Wilson 
whether it was true or not. Ileflren left the 
impression that the thousand dollars handed 
to Wilson by Bowles, was part of this corrup- 
tion fund — but Wilson virtually denies the 
whole story, by declaring that it was of 
Bowles' private funds — thus these witnesses 
contradict themselves — but when dishonored 
by apostasy, who can believe them, even when 
they corroborate each other ? Heffren swears 
that AVilson told him thus and so — Wilson 
swears that Bowles told him thus and so. 
According to Stidger, there were two other 
gentlemen in this plot against Colonel 
Bowles — General Carrington and Captain S. 
E. Jones, of Louisville — they first sent Stidger 
as a spy to Bowles. Stidger also played the 
spy on Heffren, at Salem, as he swears — all of 
which is denied by Heffren. So Bowles has 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



235 



been, and is, confronted by the military pow- 
er, the detective police of the country, and 
all the apostates of the State's evidence depart- 
ment. 

Stidger swears to two interviews with HefiF- 
ren at Salem — HefFren denies having ever 
seen Stidger at Salem. Heflfren, in turn, un- 
dertakes to swear to an interview with Beck- 
ing, the Greek fire man, at Salem — Bocking, 
this Court will remember, denies having ever 
been in Salem — thus, when the Government 
witnesses are at variance on the most vital 
points in the case, Bowles may well exclaim, 
" When rogues fall out, honest men get their 
dues," Stidger's accomplishments as a detec- 
tive are only equaled by his accomplishments 
as a witness — he is both artistic and estheti- 
cal in each character, and, I am inclined to 
think, without an amateur. My opinion is, if 
Bowles were liberated to-day, and at home, 
that these corrupt and belligerent witnesses 
could, by their blandishments, ingratiate them- 
selves again into his confidence. My amateur 
witness, Mr. Stidger, has a marvelous story 
about Bowles, Bocking and Greek fire. He 
astonishes us all by detailing a meeting at 
the Louisville Hotel, when Dr. Kalfus, Colonel 
Bowles and others met Bocking and others, and 
heard an explanation of the infernal mysteries 
of shells and Greek fire. The efl"ect of all this 
was greatly hightened by an exhibition, befoi-e 
this Court, of shells, grenades, etc., as if the 
globe itself could, and would be exploded by 
this infernal machine. This engine of univer- 
sal destruction, says Stidger, was under the su- 
pervision and patronage of this order. Bowles 
profaned the Sabbath with Bocking, in a base- 
ment in this city, experimenting with Greek 
fire, says Stidger. Bocking swears, the Court 
will recollect, that he never met Bowles in this 
city, on any such business — that he did exhibit 
his invention at the Louisville Hotel, when 
Bowles and others were present — but that 
neither Bowles nor any one else ever furnished 
money to send him to Canada — that two hun- 
dred dollars were handed him in Louisville by 
a young man to meet his pressing wants — that 
his invention was, in no sense, at any time, 
under the direction, interest, patronage, or 
favor of this order — thus flatly contradicting 
Stidger in ioio, and HefFren in part. Bocking 
swears that the invention claimed by him, 
was as open and public as the sunlight. He 
had filed a caveat at Washington, and under 
General Burnside's order, he came to Indian- 
apolis, and brought it to the notice of the 
Governor, General AVilcox, and others, as he 
had done in other States. Thus, this specter, 
which seemed so fearful and ghostly, at one 
time, vanishes into thin air, and Colonel 
Bowles is relieved of another incubus which 
amateur swearing had placed on his vitals. 
Stidger attempts to damage Colonel Bowles 
still further, by swearing that Bowles said 
he had communication with rebels South. 
This, I venture, is all moonshine, like the 
rest. But after all Stidger's bold fancies, and 
his equivocal truths, he has not the efi"rontery 
to say that Bowles ever concurred in, assented 
to, or acted upon Dodd's scheme of insurrec- 
tion ; but, on the contrary, he refused to have 



any thing to do with it, except on conditions 
which never happened, and could not happen, 
and this refusal of Colonel Bowles proves that 
no such scheme was agreed on at Chicago, 
and that he refused to agree upon any with 
Dodd at Indianapolis. No other witness 
attempts to connect Bowles with any actual 
conspiracy, and he falls short in the very es- 
sential point of consent and agreement. If 
Bowles had his own method and plan of bring- 
ing about the compromise between the two 
sections, and Dodd and Bullitt dissented, that 
was their fault, and not the fault of Colonel 
Bowles. Then if Colonel Bowles is not guilty 
of any of the charges, by reason of the Greek 
fire phantom — by holding correspondence 
with the public enemy — by arming the people 
for resistance to public authority — by contri- 
buting money to Bocking — by joining Dodd 
in his wild schemes — nor by receiving a part 
of the rebel funds — nor by agreeing at Chicago,, 
or elsewhere, to an uprising — then he must 
be acquitted on every charge, unless, indeed, 
his membership in the order convicts him — 
but this latter proposition is without either 
authority or reason to support it. So if Colonel 
Bowles be convicted, it must be either, first, by 
force of the guilty character of the order, 
which would be monstrous — or secondly, by 
force of the statements and declarations of 
members of the order, vague and distorted by 
bad memory, and made veracity — or thirdly, 
by force of the testimony of spies and detec- 
tives, equally supported and contradicted, by 
professedly guilty accomplices, who purchase 
immunity from punishment by turning State's 
evidence. Will the Court be satisfied with a 
conviction on such testimony ? According to 
the law books, it is a very dangerous charac- 
ter of testimony. And when it is considered 
that you must find the defendants guilty be- 
yond a reasonable doubt — and guilty of every 
essential element of the offense, without a 
reasonable doubt — Colonel Bowles feels strong 
in the law and the evidence — though feeble 
with disease, and infirm with age. 

The Court will not fail to take notice, that 
the Government, the better to secure the con- 
viction of these defendants, has not only 
pressed into the service accomplices, who 
prove themselves to be more guilty than most 
of those remaining on trial, but avails itself 
also of the labor and testimony of detectives, 
spies, and informers. He must be an innocent 
man indeed, or a prodigy of skill and man- 
agement, or a miracle of luck, under a special 
Providence, who can escape from the meshes 
and machinations of such a formidable horde 
of accomplices, informers, detectives and spies. 
By the indulgence of the Court, I avail myself 
of the opinion of an eminent English histo- 
rian, who described a late period of English 
history, in order to fix the moral and legal 
status of such witnesses, on the present trial, 
and in addition to which, I shall not offer any 
observations of my own — further than to say, 
that the law of evidence holds spies, detec- 
tives, informers, accomplices, and those who 
turn State's evidence, in very great detesta- 
tion; and while such witnesses are competent, 
very little credit is given their testimony. I 



236 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



quote from May's Constitutional History of Eng- 
land : 

"Next in importance to personal freedom, is 
immunity from suspicious and jealous obser- 
Tations. Men may be without any restraint 
upon their liberty ; they may pass to and fro 
at pleasure; but if their steps are tracked by 
spies and informers, their words noted down 
for crimination, their associates watched as 
conspirators — who shall say that they are 
free ? Nothing is more revolting to English- 
men than the espionage which forms part of 
the administration system of continental des- 
potisms. It haunts men like an evil genius, 
chills their gayety, restrains their wit, casts a 
shadow over their friendships, and blights 
their domestic hearth. The freedom of a coun- 
try may be measured by its immunity from 
this baleful agency. Rulers who distrust 
their own peojjle, must govern in a spirit of 
absolutism ; and suspected subjects will ever 
be sensible of their own wrongs. 

"Our own countrj'men have been compara- 
tively free from this hateful interference with 
their moral freedom. Yet we may find many 
traces of a system repugnant to the liberal 
policy of our laws. In 1764 we see spies fol- 
lowing "Wilkes every-where, dogging his steps 
like shadows, and reporting every movement 
of himself and his friends to the Secretaries of 
State. Nothing was too insignificant for the 
curiosity of these exalted magistrates. Every 
visit he paid or received throughout the day 
was noted; the persons bechanced to encoun- 
ter on tiie streets were not overlooked; it was 
known where he dined, or went to church, and 
at what hour he returned home at night. 

"In the State trials (England) of 1794, we 
discover spies and informers in the witness 
box, wlio had been active members of politi- 
cal societies, sharing their councils, and en- 
couraging, if not prompting their criminal 
extravagance. And throughout that period of 
dread and suspicion, society was evevy-where 
infested with espionage. 

"Again, in 1817, Government spies were 
deeply compromised in tlic turbulence and se- 
dition of that period. Castle, a spy of infa- 
mous character, having uttered the most sedi- 
tious language, and incited the people to arm, 
proved in the witness-box the very crimes he 
iiad himself prompted and encouraged. An- 
other spy, named Oliver, proceeded into the 
disturbed districts, in the character of a Lon- 
don delegate, and remained for many weeks 
amongst the deluded operatives, every-whei-e 
instigating them to rise and arm. lie en- 
couraged tliem with hopes that, in the event 
of a rising, they would be assisted by a hun- 
dred and filty thousand men in the metropo- 
lis; and thrusting himself into their society, 
he concealed the craft of a spy under the dis- 
guise of a traitorous conspirator. Before he 
undertook this shameful mission he was in 
communication with the ]\Iinisters, and 
throughout his niiscliievous progress was cor- 
responding with the Government or its agents. 
There is little dc>ubt tliat Oliver did more to 
disturb the public peace by his malign influ- 
ence, than to protect it by timely information 
to the Governnieut. The agent was miscliiev- 



ous, and his principals could not wholly es- 
cape the blame of his misdeeds. To the sever- 
ity of oppressive measures and a vigorous 
administration of the law, was added the re- 
proach of a secret alliance between the Exec- 
utive and a wretch who had at once bought 
and betrayed his victims. 

"The relations between the Government and 
its informers are of extreme delicacy. Not to 
profit by timely information were a crime, but 
to retain in Government pay, and to reward 
spies and informers who consort with conspir- 
ators as their sworn accomplices, and encour- 
age while they betray them in their crimes, 
is a practice for which no plea can be offered. 
No Government, indeed, can be supposed to 
have expressly instructed its spies to instigate 
the perpetration of crimes; but to be unsus- 
pected, every spy must be zealous in the cause 
which he pretends to have espoused; and his 
zeal in a criminal enterprise is a direct en- 
couragement of crime. So odious is (and 
should be) the character of a spy (or informer) 
that his ignominy is shared by his employers, 
against whom the public feeling has never 
failed to pronounce itself, in proportion to the 
infamy of the agent and the complicity of 
those whom he served." 

It has always been my habit in criminal tri- 
als, whatever I may have thought of the prob- 
abilities of conviction, to address the jury on 
the contingent measure of punishment, and at 
the hazard of misconstruction, I will invite 
your attention to that question. You, gentle- 
men, unlike tlie common law tribunals, are 
neither limited in the range of your juris- 
diction, nor circumscribed in the measure of 
your punishments. The Constitution of the 
United States furnishes no guide other than 
the injunction, that cruel and unusual pun- 
ishments shall not be inflicted, nor excessive 
fines imposed — even if this inhibition applies 
to tribunals organized under the laws of war — 
upon which there might be great difi"erence3 
of opinion among fair-minded men — since 
many military punishments are unusual and 
unknown to the common law courts. The 
Constitution of the State of Indiana, in a 
spirit of recognition of, and homage to, the 
advanced and advancing state of criminal 
jurisprudence, in the Christian world, pro- 
vides that "cruel and unusual punishments 
shall not be inflicted" — and that the "penal 
code shall be founded on the principles of 
reformation, not of vindictive justice." All 
penalties shall be proportioned to the nature 
of the "offense." These provisions are alike 
mandatory to courts and legislators, and em- 
brace, if not in their letter, at least in their 
spirit, all citizens and all tribunals. But it is 
unworthy of any tribunal, in court or camp, 
in church or State, to make vindictive justice 
tlie measure of punishment. Punishment in 
the State has the same wise ends in view, and 
the same restraints and proprieties, upon its 
indulgence, as in the family circle — not to 
gratify revenge — not in the spirit of execra- 
tion, for the kind of crime of which he is convict- 
ed — nor to punish the offender in the name of 
one crime, for a great many otlier short-com- 
ings, for wliich tl;e law hr.d fixed no penalty 



TREASON TRIALS- AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



23' 



By the act of Congress of July 17, 1862, 
death — or in the discretion of the Court, im- 
prisonment, for a period of not less than five 
years, and not less than ten thousand dollars 
fine — is imposed for the crime of treason. 

For the crime of putting on foot insurrec- 
tion, and giving aid and comfort to rebels, the 
same act prescribes imprisonment not exceed- 
ing ten years, or by fine not exceeding ten 
thousand dollars, or by both. And for either 
of these offenses, a confiscation of all prop- 
erty follows. These two offenses are embraced 
in the accusation against the accused. It is 
also provided by the act of Congress of July 
31, 1861, that the offense of conspiracy shall 
be punished by a fine of not less than five 
hundred dollars nor more than five thousand 
dollars, or by imprisonment, with or without 
hard labor, as the court shall determine, for a 
period of not less than six months, nor greater 
than six years, or by both. This is also one 
of the offenses embraced in the accusation 
against all the accused. The other two offenses, 
of "inciting insurrection," and "disloyal 
practices," are not defined or punished by any 
act of Congress, and you must look for the 
penalties, when you look for the law. 

Now, it may be argued, that as this Court 
derives its jurisdiction to try common law of- 
fenses from the laws of war, that you will 
look to the laws of war for the definition of 
crimes, and the fixation of their penalties. 
There is some force in this argument, I admit — 
but it carries a crushing retroactive stroke of 
logic against the jurisdiction itself. For if 
the jurisdiction rests on no law — and all 
crimes and penalties are to be looked for 
among the dim and stained repositories of the 
laws of war, or among the fickle, ubiquitous, 
but unknown fountains of martial law — then 
we have lost our foothold on the terra firma of 
law, and have become the sport of the winds 
and waves that are bearing us, at this time, 
to an unknown shore. The latitude and long- 
itude of judicial navigation are lost — inno- 
cence has no sure protection, and guilt no cer- 
tain punishment — might gives right — law 
hides itself, and justice is measured by the 
strength and will of the tribunal and the de- 
fenseless condition of the accused. This is 
abstract argument, not intended for this Court, 
whose courtesy and justice, thus far, we have 
had so much reason to commend. But at least, 
if conscience demands the conviction of one 
or more of the accused, it would be a conso- 
lation and a shield of justification, hereafter, 
when our political skies have cleared away, to 
know, that if you could point to no statute 
for your jurisdiction, that you could for the 
crime and its penalty. 

The true criterion, doubtless, is that medial 
line, which by its severity — but more by its 
certainty — deters the incorrigible, and reforms 
the penitent offender — while its cruelty and. 



vindictiveness do not give a greater shock to 
the public sense than did the crime for which 
he is punished — and create a sympathy for the 
offender and horror for the Court. These are 
unfavorable times for the admeasurement of 
punishment, all must admit, where the offense, 
or the offender, has to stem the sirocco breath 
of our nation's present heavy breathings. The 
outside current is strong against the secret or- 
der of the Sons of Liberty, and if a defense of 
the accused necessarily involved a defense of 
the order, as a political institution, I should 
despair of the task. Time, and a very limited 
exercise of reason, will make plain to the 
popular mind, as it has already to this 
Court, I trust, the difference between the crim- 
inality of the order, and the criminality of par- 
ticular members, at remote distances from each 
other. And when this mingled pageant of 
bright bayonets and bloody horrors — of mil- 
itary victories and political defeats — of rival 
military and civil courts — shall have passed 
away — and when reason shall dethrone pas- 
sion, and when this great nation, with gar- 
ments now bathed in blood, shall lift her head 
above the clouds, and clothe herself again in 
the majesty of law — may we have no record of 
these cases, that we or posterity will blush to 
read. When the unclouded intellect of the 
nation is again supreme, in its sway, much 
of the work, besides that of the Sons of Liberty, 
to which prejudice and malignity are now de- 
voted, will not receive the sanction, even,,of 
popular approval. 

Now, Mr. President, and gentlemen of the 
Commission, my task is done, whilst yours, in 
its gravest responsibility, is before you. 
Humphreys has an unblemished character, 
the growth of many sacrifices, and the exer- 
cise of many virtues — he has a career of honor 
and usefulness among men, in the future — he 
has an interesting family, whose fate, fortune 
and happiness are involved in his own — he 
has a noble, dauntless, unbroken spirit, which 
he would not exchange for that of all his 
accusers — he has life, liberty and happiness — • 
all staked on the issue; and I commit them 
all to your keeping. 

And here is Colonel Bowles, sobered alike 
by age and the solemnity of the crisis that has 
overtaken him — with a frame bowed, some- 
what, by the storms of life — intimately iden- 
tified with the past legislative and military 
history of our State — soon, in the course of 
nature, nothing will remain of him but his 
memory — he fondly hopes that his memory is 
not to be blackened by the stigma of convic- 
tion — his family and friends will gather 
around his grave, and protect that memory, 
when dead, if you will shield it while living. 
You might convict and remove him, but great 
abuses, bad laws, and defective institutions, 
would still remain. I commend him to your 
mercy. 



ARGUMENT OF JOHN R. COFFROTH, 



IN DEFENSE OF 



L. P. MILLIGAN 



Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Commission: 

I am counsel for Mr. Milligan alone. My 
argument, therefore, will be more especially 
directed to matters •which concern his defense. 

These defendants are on joint trial; their 
motion for separate trials having been denied 
them by this Commission. That matter is 
passed, and I do not wish to refer to it com- 
plainingly — propriety forbids it; but, as an 
act of truth, as well as of simple justice to my 
client, it is my duty to state, most solemnly, 
that that refusal has most materially and 
vitally embarrassed and prejudiced his de- 
fense. Evidence of the most vital importance 
to him was not introduced from the selfish op- 
position of a co-defendant, induced by the fear 
that that evidence might remotely affect him. 
We yielded to that opposition, even to the 
prejudice of my client's good name, beyond 
which, in this trial, he has but little concern. 

By the common law of practice, a separate 
trial of persons jointly charged with a felony, 
h-as been rarely refused, even in cases where 
the accused were charged with the commission 
of a single act, committed at the same time 
and place; while in this, and many other 
States, the separate trial of persons, jointly 
indicted for a felony, is expressly guaranteed 
by statute. I only refer to this matter in ex- 
planation of our silence on points upon which 
we otherwise should have been heard "trumpet- 
tongued" by the evidence. 

This is a remarkable case, not only in its 
inception, but in its progress. Strange lights 
have gleamed in upon us, showing the baleful 
effects of partisan selfishness and malice; for 
this cause has assumed in its progress more 
of a political than a criminal prosecution. 
You are sitting in judgment upon political 
opponents for alleged political offenses: let 
the history of the past admonish you against 
lending a too willing ear to what may be the 
perjured tale of accomplices, paid spies or in- 
formers. This is a State trial, a political 
trial; and in all such trials, the tribunal be- 
fore which the accused are immediately held 
to answer, is not the only one that sits in 
judgment. The cause before this tribunal is 
about to close; but it is continued, for the 
Bober second thought, before that other self- 
correcting tribunal — public opinion — whose 
decree frequently reverses the first hasty de- 
cision, and whose final judgment is most gen- 
erally right. It is true that ttat final judg- 
ment may come too late for Mr. Milligan, but 
238 



his children will reap its advantage. "The 
mills of the gods grind slowly, but they grind 
exceedingly fine." I shall be pardoned foi 
this allusion, if it be remembered that it is 
very difficult to live in a poisoned atmosphere 
without inha.ing a portion of the miasma. 

During the whole progress of this trial, par- 
tisan hate, with blind and fiendish malignity, 
has been demanding blood. In many of the 
public journals, the evidence has been gar- 
bled, misrepresented and perverted, and then 
criticised — begetting a mad fury in the minds 
of a victorious party, dethroning truth, and 
making us, at times, tremble for fear of a par- 
tial judgment. But, fortunately for the cause 
of justice, during the lengthy progress of the 
trial, the storm has, in some measure, spent its 
fury, and already the truth begins to peep 
from behind the cloud. The first judgment of 
that other tribunal is even now undergoing 
review. The voices that cried "hosannah," 
afterward shouted "crucify;" and the wild ac- 
claim that welcomed the return of King 
Charles, and proclaimed the Restoration, came 
from the same throats that had howled with 
savage fury for his blood. 

" Hearest thou," he said, " the loud acclaim, 
With which they shout the Douglas' uame ; 
With like acclaim the vulgar throat 
Strained for King James their morning note ; 
With like acclaim they hail'd the day 
When first I broke the Douglas' sway ; 
And like acclaim would Douglas greet 
If he could hurl me from my seat." 

The first question in order that presents 
itself, in the consideration of this cause, is as 
to the jurisdiction of this military tribunal to 
try these defendants, who are all citizens of 
Indiana, and in no wise connected with the 
army or navy of the United States; and, 
therefore, entitled, by the Federal Constitu- 
tion, to "a speedy and public trial, by an im- 
partial jury of the State and district wherein 
the crime shall have been committed," and not 
by such a tribunal as this Commission, com- 
posed, as it is, of citizens of Indiana, Michi- 
gan and Massachusetts. But this question of 
jurisdiction has been so ably and so fully 
argued by my learned brother, Gordon, (who 
is counsel for other of the defendants,) that 
any further elucidation is unnecessary, if not 
impossible; for the whole subject, to my mind, 
has been, by him, most learnedly and ex- 
haustively argued. 

Allow me, then, at once, to call your atten- 
tion to the charges, and to the evidence ia 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



239 



Bupport of them. The charges are as fol- 
lows: 

1. Conspiracy against the Goyernment of 
the United States. 

2. Affording aid and comfort to rebels 
against the authority of the United States. 

3. Inciting insurrection. 

4. Disloyal practices. 

5. Violating the laws of war. 

The gist of the specification to these charges 
may be thus stated: That these defendants or- 
ganized and disseminated, and were members 
of the "Order of American Knights, or Sons 
of Liberty," which was both civil and mili- 
tary ; that this society was unlawful and 
treasonable; that it was armed, and was de- 
signed to aid the rebels, and to overthrow the 
Government; that the defendants conspired 
with Dodd, and others, to seize certain State 
and United States Arsenals, and to release and 
arm rebel prisoners. That they counseled and 
incited resistance to the draft, and attempted 
to introduce the enemies of the United States 
within the loyal portions thereof, and held 
communication with them. 

In support of these charges and specifica- 
tions, the main facts proven against Mr. Milli- 
gan are, that he is a member of the '-Order of 
American Knights, or Sons of Liberty;" that 
he attended two Grand Councils of the society, 
held at Indianapolis, the one in November, 
1863, and the other in June, 1864; and that he 
was appointed by the order a Major-General 
thereof. Some minor matters of evidence will 
be noticed in the course of this argument. 
We are, therefore, at once led to the inquiry, 
was the Order of American Knights a con- 
spiracy ^er se, and was it treasonable? 

"A conspiracy is a corrupt agreeing together, 
by two or more, to do, by concerted action, 
something unlawful, either as a means or an 
end." 2 Bishop Crivi. Law, § 149. The legality 
of the agreement, then, becomes a pertinent 
question in this branch of our inquiry, or, 
rather, the illegality of the act or acts that are 
agreed to be done. It, therefore, becomes 
necessary to institute a careful examination of 
the several acts that the "Sons of Liberty" 
agreed to do; and, first, let us look at the 
ground work of that society — at its declara- 
tion of principles. 

And, while reading, I ask you to forget, for 
the time being, that they are, in any way, con- 
nected with the Sons of Liberty, and then let 
us ask ourselves what part we will condemn. 

" DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES. 

"1st. Essence Ethereal, Eternal, Supreme — 
by us called God — hath created, pervades and 
controls the universe! dwells in man, and is 
the DIVINITY within him. 

"Sponsors — Amen. 

"2d. All men are endowed by the Creator 
with certain rights, equal only so far as there is 
equality in the capacity for the appreciation, 
enjoyment and exercise of those rights, some 
of which are inalienable, while others may, 
by voluntary act or consent, be qualified, sus- 
pended or relinquished, for the purpose of social 
governmental organization, or may be taken 
away from the individual by the supremacy of 



the law which he himself hath ordained, in 
conjunction with his fellows, for their mutual 
protection and advancement toward perfect 
civilization. 

"3d. Government arises from the necessities 
of a well organized society. 

"4th. Right government derives its sole au- 
thority from the will of the governed, expressly 
declared. [ The majorifif should express such will in 
the mode which the unanimous voice shall approve, 
always guaranteeing to each individual, unless he 
shall have been restrained by the law, the privilege 
and opportunity to make known his opinion and 
express his will in regard to all matters relating or 
pertaining to the Government.'^ 

"5th. The grand purpose of government is 
the welfare of the governed; its success is 
measured by the degree of progress, which 
the people shall have attained to the most ex- 
alted civilization. 

"6th. Government founded on the princi- 
ples enunciated in the foregoing propositions 
is designated Democracy. The division of a 
Territory, where it exists, is usually called a 
Republic, sometimes a State. 

"7th. Reflection, observation and experience 
seem to have established, in the minds of wise 
and impartial men, the conclusion that ^De- 
mocracy,^ properly organized upon the great 
principles which our Revolutionary ancestors, 
patriots and sages, held, inculcated and de- 
fended, best achieved the grand and munifi- 
cent end of human government. 

"8th. The Government organized and ex- 
isting in the original thirteen States of North 
America, when they had severally and unitedly 
renounced their allegiance to the Government 
of Great Britain, and dissolved their former 
colonial relations, we regard as the wisest and 
best adapted to the nature and character of 
the people inhabiting the continent of North 
America at the present day. Under the be- 
nign influence of that Government a nation 
has arisen, and attained a degree of power 
and splendor which has no parallel in the 
history of the human race. 

"9th. The Government designated 'The 
United States of America,' which blazons the 
historic page, and shed its light along the 
path of future ages, was the transcendent 
conception and mighty achievement of wis- 
dom, enlightened patriotism and virtue, which 
appear to have passed from earth amidst the 
fading glories of the golden era, which they 
illustrated with immortal splendor. That 
Government was created originally by thirteen 
free, sovereign and independent States, for their 
mutual benefit, to administer the affairs of 
their common interest and concern; being en- 
dowed with the powers, dignity and su- 
premacy, and no further, or other, which are 
distinctly specified, and warranted, and con- 
ferred by the strict letter of the immortal 
compact — the Constitution of the United States. 

" Sponsors — Amen." 

I ask you to read this declaration of princi- 
ples, and to examine them closely. Are they 
not, so far as they have any signification, the 
very principles upon which our Government 
was administered in the "better days of the 



240 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Republic," when it was in the very noontide 
of its prosperity and glory ; and which have 
canonized their authors as the apostles of civil 
liberty in America? "Which one of those 
principles is it unlawful to hold, inculcate 
and defend ? But I pass from them as need- 
ing no comment. 

But, perhaps, the obligations of the order 
are thought to be objectionable ? During the 
progress of this trial, our attention has been 
particularly called to the following clause, as 
the only dbnoxious one ! by the frequency 
with which it has been read to the witnesses : 

"I do furtlier swear that I will, at all times, 
if needs be, take up arms in the cause of the 
oppressed — in my own country first of all — 
against any monarchy prince, potentate, power or 
government usurped, which may be found in 
arms, waging war against a people or peoples, 
who are endeavoring to establish or have in- 
augurated a government for themselves, in 
accordance with, and founded upon, the eter- 
nal principles of truth, which I have sworn 
in the Vestibule, and now in this presence do 
swear to maintain inviolate and defend with 
my life." 

Thei-e is no agreement here to do a particu- 
lar act ; it is a mere promise, upon a given 
case which may never arise — for we trust that 
the Government will not adopt the necessity 
of admitting that any of the contingencies 
upon which this obligation presupposes the 
taking up of arms as necessary, have hap- 
pened or do exist, or that there is even a prox- 
imate likelihood of their happening — and 
which the accused say, by their action and 
inaction, have not happened. Let us analyze 
this pledge. And first, who were they to take 
up arms against? "A monarch, prince, po- 
tentate, power, or government usurped." 
Now, we feel confident that we may, with 
propriety, dismiss all the objects of this seem- 
ing warlike proposition, except the last, for 
the reason that we can not believe that the 
Government will insist that in this, our coun- 
try, "any monarch or prince" has been 
"found in arms," etc. We will, therefore, con- 
fine our remarks to the last pioposition, that 
is, as to a "power or government usurped;" 
and I here ask the learned Judge Advocate if 
he is prepared to proclaim to the world that 
this Government is a usurped one, in order to 
make this obligation to take up arms apply to 
it? The declaration would be as startling as 
any that the defendants are charged with. 

I have no purpose to conceal tlie views of 
Mr. Milligan, and freely admit that he may 
have said, what every intelligent man in 
America knows, that the President, the Con- 
gress, and the military authorities, have each 
and all exercised particular powers that did 
not belong to them ; yet, I submit that he is a 
gentleman of too much intelligence to enter- 
tain or express tlie opinion that our Federal 
Government is an usurped one, or that Mr. 
Lincoln is not tlie lawful President, elected 
according to the forms of law, and, as such, 
entitled to the respect due to his station. 
True, the defendant lias criticised Mr. Lin- 
coln's acts, and so have the American people, 
as they have claimed and exercised the right 



to criticise the acts of all administrations 
since our existence as a people, Washington's 
not excepted. The exercise of denied powers, 
history informs us, has by the people usually 
been denominated usurpations. But, I trust, 
this Commission will not lose sight of the dis- 
tinction between charging a legitimate Gov- 
ernment with exercising powers denied to 
it — using the term " usurp " with reference 
to the exercise of such powers — and charging 
a Government with being a usurped one. But, 
if any one should, unfortunately for the defense, 
be of opinion that the Government is a usurpa- 
tion, still I insist that neither the defendants 
as individuals, nor the Order of American 
Knights, or Sons of Liberty, ever entertained 
or expressed such sentiments, but that they 
have ever treated the Government, including 
the President, the Courts, the Congress, and 
the Army, as legitimate, each in its sphere. 
For the proof of this I appeal to their acts. 
Where has that order taken up arms or made 
any preparation to do so, either by organizing, 
arming or drilling the members ? But it is 
claimed that Mr. Milligan, in public speeches, 
advised resistance to any encroachment upon 
the elective franchise. Suppose he did ; who 
would not and be a man ? And suppose fur- 
ther that he expressed the opinion that these 
encroachments would come from the army ! 
Yet, will it be assumed that such encroach- 
ments, had they come, would have been the 
act of the Government? and that resistance 
to such encroachments would be resistance to 
the Government? If so, then there are mil- 
lions of men aspiring to be freemen, who are 
guilty criminals, deserving the fate now 
threatened these defendants. 

That this obligation did not contemplate the 
taking up of arms against the Federal Gov- 
ernment, is fully shown by the fact that the 
order did not take up arms ; nor was any re- 
solve or movement made in any of its author- 
ized councils, temples, or meetings, to do so, 
but, on the contrary, the evidence of Mr. 
Ibach shows, that at the Grand Council of 
June, 1864, on a resolution being introduced, 
pledging the order to resist the draft, it was 
promptly and with great unanimity voted 
down ; and that the belligerent gentleman 
who introduced the resolution, went away 
much dissatisfied with the Order. And may 
he not have been some bosom friend of General 
Carrington, a la Stidger and Zumro ? That 
there may have been persons in the organiza- 
tion who would have gazed with delight upon 
the torch being applied that should kindle the 
tlames of civil war, and who hoped to find a 
helping hand in the order, I do not deny; but, 
from the evidence, I do deny that the order had 
any such purpose. Nor is the order respon- 
sible for the individual acts of its members, 
any more than a Church, or a lodge of Masons, 
is responsible for the treasonable acts of any 
or ev(fn all of its members. Mr. Harrison esti- 
mates the number of the order in Indiana at 
18,000. I respectfully ask the Judge Advo- 
cate if he will say, that that mighty host are 
all responsible for the insane ravings and 
actions of Dodd & Co., and therefore traitors ? 
If 60, why have they not been arrested ? Why 



I 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



241 



are they not brought before a military tribu- 
nal, and put through the forms of trial and 
hanged? If they are traitors, they should be. 
What a grand spectacle it would present ! 
How proud would be the bearing of that brave 
and gallant General who has, by his paid spies 
and informers, been so industriously extending 
this order, duping innocent men into it, ini- 
tiating rebel officers, carrying messages be- 
tween Dodd & Co., and traitors in arms, and 
facilitating by all possible means the grand 
carnival of blood that was to have been inaug- 
urated in this city on the 16th of last August ! 
It is true, the accumulated wail of widows 
and orphans would have risen, even to the 
threshold of the Courts of Heaven, and what 
of all that ? the strength of the Democratic 
party would be very much broken, and the 
soul of John Brown would go "marching on." 

We have been informed that the commanders 
of armies frequently resort to such means. 
Possibly. But who ever heard of a com- 
mander sending out agents to recruit for the 
ranks of an enemy? AVhat would be thought 
of General Grant if he should send out 
agents to recruit for the purpose of filling 
up the decimated ranks of Lee's army? And 
yet Carrington paid and encouraged Stidger 
to extend, as rapidly as possible, an organiza- 
tion that is claimed to be treasonable. And 
Zumro, another of his infamous spies, in- 
veigled innocent and unsuspecting farmers 
into it for the purpose of betraying them into 
peril. 

But I must refer, again, to that obnoxious 
obligation, in order to obtain a fair and ra- 
tional interpretation of its phraseology, and 
to ascertain if it is not consistent with patri- 
otism and most devoted loyalty, if you please. 
It is a promise to take up arms, if needs be, 
against particular forms of Government, 
"found in arms, waging war against a people 
or peoples who are endeavoring to establish 
or have inaugurated a government for them- 
selves, of their own free choice, and in ac- 
cordance with, and founded upon, the eternal 
principles of truth." Having shown that no 
usurped Government exists in this country, 
and that the order has not found it necessary 
to take up arms at all; let us endeavor to as- 
certain if the contingency has happened, upon 
which they obligated themselves to take up 
arms for the people or peoples in whose behalf 
they propose to volunteer. And we inquire 
where is that people "who have established or 
inaugurated a government of their own free 
choice, and in accordance with, and founded 
upon, the eternal principles of truth?" It will 
not do to say that the Southern Confederacy 
is that people, for it would be a eulogy on 
Jeff Davis' Government more glowing than 
any Son of Liberty ever uttered. Is their 
cause that of the oppressed? Is our Govern- 
ment a usurpation? Is the Southern Confed- 
eracy founded upon the eternal principles of 
truth? All this must be admitted in order to 
make a state of things upon which they agreed 
to take up arms. 

But it is claimed that this obligation has a 
different meaning, known to and understood 
by the order. Allow me to invite your atten- 
16 



tion to the evidence upon that point. There 
are but three witnesses whose testimony tends 
to support that view: Tranter, Teney and 
Robertson. A case must be desperate indeed 
which relies for support on the testimony of 
such witnesses — ignorant and stupid beyond 
comparison. I am at a loss to know how the 
latter ever found his way from the woods of 
Randolph county to this Capitol; the other 
two were drafted and duly escorted here, and 
no doubt testified under the hope of indul- 
gence from the draft in proportion as their 
testimony might prove valuable. Tranter and 
Teney contradict each other in almost every 
particular, except that they both swear that 
John W. Stone told them that the Circle of the 
Mighty Host, and also the Golden Circle, were 
to "assist Jeff Davis north and south." Tran- 
ter swears that this obligation was a part of . 
the Golden Circle, but not of the Mighty Host. 
Teney, who was not a member of the Golden 
Circle, says that he was of the Mighty Host. 
But neither of these pillars of the Government 
was a member of the American Knights or 
Sons of Liberty. The evidence further shows 
that both the defendant. Horsey, and the Gov- 
ernment witness, Connell, denied and repudi- 
ated the declarations of John AV. Stone, who, 
for aught that appears in the evidence, may 
have been a Stidger or a Zumro. But in op- 
position to this apology for testimony, we have 
the evidence of two Government witnesses, 
Messrs. Bingham and Harrison, and in addi- 
tion thereto the testimony oi the large array 
of witnesses for the defendants — all of the 
most honorable character, and many holding 
the highest social and official positions — com- 
ing from various sections of the State, all 
bearing witness to the fact that the objects 
of the order were purely political, and in- 
tended solely to operate upon the elections by 
a more systematic organization of the Demo- 
cratic party ; just as the Republican party 
was doing through the instrumentality of the 
Loyal League, which it was intended to coun- 
teract; and none of them understanding the 
obligation to mean any thing more than it 
said, or than the words themselves rationally 
implied. The testimony of Mr. Bingham is 
conclusive upon this point; he early became a 
member, attended Grand Councils, acted on 
committees, and was in almost daily inter- 
course with Dodd and other leading members 
of the order, and yet never knew of any 
other than its political character until Dodd 
revealed his insane and hellish proposition, 
when he immediately took measures to circum- 
vent it. And, I submit, that the conduct of 
Mr. Bingham is in a commendable contrast to 
that of the authorities. As soon as he was 
informed of Dodd's proposed plot, his best ef- 
fort^were at once directed to paralyze the em- 
bryo rebellion; while, on the other hand, the 
authorities who knew it all, long before Mr. 
Bingham did, instead of destroying it, were ^ 
nursing and encouraging it, that it might 
bring forth the ripe fruit of anarchy, strife, 
and bloodshed. The evidence of Stidger, their 
detective and witness, shows that while under 
the pay and direction of Carrington, and with 
his consent and approbation, he (Stidger) was 



242 



TREASON TRIALS AT mDIANAPOLIS. 



extending the order as rapidly as possible, 
both in Indiana and Kentucky; that with the 
same approbation he initiated rebel officers, 
carried messages between Dodd and others 
and officers in the Confederate service, and af- 
forded every facility to Dodd and his immedi- 
ate confederates to arrange and perfect the 
plan for the inauguration of civil war in- In- 
diana, keeping the authorities here constantly 
advised of every movement, by regular and 
frequent reports; and all this for the sole pur- 
pose of influencing the then pending elections ! 
History affords no parallel to the dark, malig- 
nant designs against peace and good order, on 
the part of those intrusted with their presei-- 
vation. They were fully advised of the exist- 
ence of what they claim to have been a most 
infernal conspiracy against the peace of the 
State ; they witnessed the maturing of the 
Bcheme; they watched the preparation of the 
brand that was to enkindle civil war, and yet 
raised not a finger to stop it. Like the tiger, 
standing at the edge of his jungle, watching 
the unfortunate traveler as he comes along, 
springs upon his victim, crushes his bones and 
laps up his blood; so they looked with savage 
delight upon the proposed uprising, regarding 
no other consequence than its probable influ- 
ence upon the elections. It seemed to matter 
little to them, though the fire of civil war 
should desolate our homes, and cause the 
" shuddering mother to hug her babe more 
closely to her bosom," so that they could only 
remain masters of the burnt and blackened 
field. If Mr. Milligan merits penalties for 
knowing nothing about these alleged conspira- 
cies, what meed of punishment is due to those 
authorities? 

According to the theory of the prosecution, 
Bingham was a Son of Liberty, and therefore 
a co-conspirator with Dodd; and yet it is to 
Bingham, and not to the authorities, that the 
people of Indiana are indebted for being saved 
from the woes and horrors of civil war. He 
quenched the flame that the authorities were 
fanning. While they were nursing, he was 
Btifling it. This may not unjustly have given 
rise to the dark suggestion, now current 
throughout the State, that Dodd was the mere 
hired tool of Carrington and his co-conspira- 
tors against the peace of the State. But it is 
asked why did not Bingham denounce Dodd 
to the authorities? My answer is, they knew 
all about it, long before he did; and in turn, 
I demand, on behalf of the people of Indiana, 
whose homes were in jeopardy, why did the 
authorities suffer Dodd and Walker to remain 
in this city, unarrested, for weeks after they 
were apprised of the whole plot? Surely they 
could not have considered it dangerous. If I 
am asked why Mr. Milligan did not act as did 
Bingham; my answer is, that he had no 
knowledge of the scheme until it was exposed 
and abandoned. 

But I return again to the consideration of 
that obligation, as it is the only prop upon 
which the prosecution can reasonably rest its 
claim that the order is a conspiracy j>er »e; 
and I submit, that its meaning must be ascer- 
tained by the same rules by which other 
writings are construed by the courts — that is, 



by the import of the words taken in their or- 
dinary or common acceptation, the sense in 
which they are generally used and received. 
For, otherwise, how are the members to know 
the meaning of the obligation, especially in 
the absence of such lights as Captain Burke- 
bile, Wesley Tranter and John W. Stone? Let 
it be borne in mind that this order was secret, 
and, therefore, there could be no motive for 
making the obligation mean more than, or 
different from what the language imported. 
I submit, therefore, that the Commission will 
not feel called upon to adopt a rule of interpre- 
tation heretofore unknown to judicial investi- 
gations, in order to make offensive that which 
is otherwise harmless; and especially against 
such an array of testimony to the contrary. 

If the order of American Knights, or Sons 
of Liberty, is a conspiracy per se, it is only a 
conspiracy to do what the rational import of 
the obligations, the ritual, and the declara- 
tion of principles imposed upon its members 
at the time they became such; and therefore, 
no after agreement of certain of its members, 
no matter how high in rank, to do a particular 
thing, not within the purview of the order, 
can be charged to the order, nor to any of its 
members not actually a party to such subse- 
quent agreement. This I submit as a legal 
proposition, and challenge contradiction. To 
make the act or declaration of a conspirator 
binding upon another, it must be made or 
done in pursuance of the originally concerted 
plan, and with reference to the common ob- 
ject. 1 Greenl. JEv., § 111, et eeq.; 2 Stark. Ev^ 
233, et seq. 

Let us apply this principle. And here I will 
assume, with all confidence, that it will not be 
held that any of the obligations of the order 
proposed that Camps Morton, Douglas, etc., 
were to be emptied of their prisoners. If that 
was agreed to, who were the parties to the 
agreement? From the evidence, if it was 
agreed to at all, it was simply an open propo- 
sition of Dodd's; or, if you choose to give it 
the latitude claimed by that "mud-sill" of in- 
famy, who, .after being on joi»t trial for three 
weeks, turned informer, in order to purchase 
his own release, illustrating the truth of the 
adage that "it is always the biggest scoundrel 
that turns State's evidence ;" — of that crea- 
ture — but I will not speak of him; contempt 
has the property of descending very low, but 
to even that there is a limit, and it therefore 
stops far short of Horace Heffren. I repeat, if 
we adopt his statement, that the parties to the 
conspiracy to seize the arsenals and liberate 
the prisoners, consisted of delegates from all 
the States but two, and that all the delegates 
v/ere Sons of Liberty; yet, unless that con- 
spiracy comes fairly within the purview of the 
order, it implicates no one but the parties ac- 
tually agreeing to the unlawful undertaking. 
Dodd, Heffren, Wilson, and others, may have 
conspired, but it was only their own con- 
spiracy, and Mr. Milligan and other of the de- 
fendants are not shown to have taken any 
part in it, or to have had any knowledge of it, 
and, therefore, are not conspirators with Dodd. 
Hence, their declarations and admissions are 
not legitimate evidence against this defendant. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



243 



For example: Suppose that A conspires with 
B to rob the mail, and that, during the exist- 
ence of that conspiracy, B conspires with C to 
kill Governor Morton ; now, upon the trial of 
A for the former conspiracy, the declarations 
of B and C would not be competent, although 
they are parties with A to another conspiracy. 
Thus certain persons became members of the 
Sons of Liberty; a part of them afterward, 
without the knowledge or consent of the 
others, conspired to seize arsenals and release 
rebel prisoners, etc. Can those other members, 
by any principle of law, be bound by the 
declaration of those conspirators, or be held 
to answer for their acts? Why, the evidence 
shows that Dodd not only contemplated duping 
and inveigling the Sons of Liberty into his 
scheme, but also the whole Democratic party. 
You might, therefore, with as much propriety, 
hold the individual members of that party re- 
sponsible, as the individual members of the 
Sons of Liberty, who, like Mr. Milligan, (I 
speak by the evidence,) had no knowledge of 
it whatever. Says Mr. Justice Buller, in 
Hardy's case: "Before the evidence of the 
conspiracy can affect the prisoner materially, 
it is necessary to make out another point, to- 
wit, that he consented to the extent that the others 
did." 2 Stark. Ev., 234. And in the course of 
the same trial, Mr. Roscoe says, "It was said 
by Eyre, C. J., that in a case of conspiracy, 
general evidence of the thing conspired is 
received, and then the party before the Court 
is to be affected /or his share of it." Ros. Crim. 
Ev., 414. 

"The rule," says Mr. Starkie, "that one 
man is not to be affected by the acts and 
declarations of a stranger, rests upon the 
principles of purest justice; and although the 
courts, in cases of conspiracy, have, out of 
convenience, and on account of the diflBculty 
in otherwise proving the guilt of the parties, 
admitted the acts and declarations of strangers 
to be given in evidence, in order to establish 
ihefact of a conspiracy, it is to be remembered 
that this is an inversion of the usual order for 
the sake of convenience, and that such evi- 
dence is in the result material so far only as 
the assent of the accused to what had been 
done by others was proved." 2 Stark. Ev., 235. 

If insurrection was one of the purposes of 
the order, why was not that subject intro- 
duced, discussed or suggested in some of its 
business meetings, when none but those in its 
secrets were supposed to be present? And 
yet neither Government detectives nor truck- 
ling accomplices ever heard of it. But it is 
said that there was an inner circle of the or- 
der, namely, the military part of it, and that 
that was treasonable. Harrison states that the 
order was fully organized at Terre Haute, and 
a Grand Council appointed. In this organiza- 
tion there was no military feature, and it was 
not till long afterward that what was termed 
the "military bill," or military feature of the 
Order, was introduced; and yet, while all the 
other proceedings of the order, including re- 
ports from county temples, were printed and 
circulated, this "military bill" was not. In 
fact, it remained a dead letter, and was not 
even known to members of the Grand Council, 



as we are informed by witnesses of the most 
honorable character, such as Judge Lough- 
ridge, and Messrs. Bird, Ibach and Winters, 
all members of the Grand Council, and who 
were never advised of any other than the po- 
litical character of the order. The military 
feature, therefore, never formed any part of 
tlie order; and if it existed at all, was only a 
part of an independent conspiracy of Dodd 
and others. 

I come now to the consideration of another 
inquiry, to which I respectfully ask your at- 
tention. Is there any legal evidence of a con- 
spiracy, even on the part of Dodd and others? 
Do all the acts and declarations proven, make 
out a conspiracy within the meaning of the 
law? although I insist that Mr. Milligan is 
not concerned in this inquiry. "A conspiracy 
is a corrupt agreement to do, by concerted ac- 
tion, something unlawful." [^Bishop, supra.'\ 
Let us, then, see what, if any thing, was 
agreed upon; for if what is charged was ac- 
tually agreed upon, I will admit that it is 
both corrupt and unlawful. 

It is claimed that the meeting at Chicago, of 
July 20, 1864, conspired to seize certain ar- 
senals, release rebel prisoners, and revolu- 
tionize the Government. But what evidence 
has been given in support of that propo- 
sition? 

Heffren swears that Wilson told him that 
this uprising was agreed upon at Chicago. 
But Wilson, who was there, swears that no 
business (to his knowledge) was done at that 
meeting; that Barrett, who had called it, said 
it was to be a meeting of military men, but 
that they had not come. Wilson tells us that 
several plans were talked of; that Dodd's plan 
seemed to meet with most favor, but was not 
agreed upon. This is certainly better evi- 
dence than the hearsay of Heffren; besides, it 
is corroborated by the testimony of Harrison 
and Bingham, and also by the very character 
of Dodd's plan. What did Dodd tell Harrison? 
He says: "If it was agreed upon, he (Dodd) 
was to have charge of releasing the rebel pris- 
oners at this point." Again, Harrison informs 
us that Dodd told him that it was not finally 
agreed upon, but depended upon a consulta- 
tion of prominent individuals, whom he was to 
summon together for the purpose of deter- 
mining as to his plan. And here flows in an 
item of evidence which can not be explained 
on any other principle than this uprising had 
not been agreed upon. It is this: Dr. Bowles 
(as the evidence clearly shows) was at the 
Chicago meeting. Now, had the uprising been 
agreed upon there. Dr. JBowles would have un- 
derstood the whole affair. Why, then, would 
Dodd send his son to Bowles (as Harrison 
says) to consult upon the proposition? The 
evidence also shows that it was for the pur- 
pose of consultation that Milligan, Hum- 
phreys, Yeakle, Taylor and others were sum- 
moned by Dodd. Nor was this call confined 
to the so-called Major-Generals, but embraced 
others, to-wit: Yeakle and Taylor. They were 
not ordered to report to Dodd for duty, but 
were to consider the propriety of an uprising, 
and to decide whether or not it should take 
place. 



244 



TREASON TRIALS AT IMDIANAPOLIS. 



All of DocUVs declarations show that the 
uprising was not determined upon by the very 
parties whose consent and co-operation were 
necessary to its inauguration. You will re- 
member the fact that the meeting in Chicago 
was on the 20th of July, when Dodd was in 
company with Judge Bullitt ; that immediately 
upon his return home, he communicated the 
matter to Harrison, who fixes the date of that 
return at the 29th of the same month; and 
also that the proposed uprising was to take 
place on ihe 16th of August. Now, if the 
scheme had been agreed upon at Chicago, to 
take place within so short a period, is it ra- 
tional to suppose that Dodd, who is represented 
to be an impetuous, hasty man, would have 
slept until more than one-third of the time 
had elapsed before he made any move toward 
that preparation which would necessarily re- 
quire so much time in maturing? The idea 
is preposterous; the impetuosity of Dodd 
would have put the thing in motion at once. 
Btit we have the sworn statement of three of 
the Government witnesses, that the uprising 
had not been agreed upon, but was awaiting 
the sanction and co-operation of others, whose 
concurrence was necessary. 

Not only do Wilson and Harrison state that 
the project was not agreed to, but Bingham 
(to whom Dodd divulged his whole plan, and 
who, according to Dodd's statement, was the 
only person to whom ft had been revealed) 
informs us that Dodd's scheme required his 
consent as a condition precedent. That he 
(Bingham) as chairman of the Democratic 
State Central Comyiiitee, must agree to it, 
and co-operate with him, by calling a mass 
convention of the Democracy of the State as 
a part of the programme, without which co-op- 
eration on the part of Bingham, the whole 
scheme would have to be abandoned; as it 
could not otherwise receive its initiatory im- 
pulse. Now this whole thing is consistent 
with itself, for the Commission will bear in 
mind Mr. Harrison's testimony, that when 
Dodd sent him to notify Mr. Milligan to at- 
tend this council of the leading men of the 
order, he instructed him not to inform Milli- 
gan of the nature of his errand, but merelj' 
to state that business of a very important char- 
acter would be considered. 

I ask here (though for the time digressing) 
if this looks as though Mr. Milligan knew of 
the scheme, especially when it is further re- 
membered that he did not attend the proposed 
council? I respectfully ask the learned Judge 
Advocate to answer this if he can. If Mr. 
Milligan was a co-conspirator with Dodd, whj' 
must he be kept in ignorance of the project? 
Why instruct the messenger to observe silence 
as to the proposed revolution? Does it not 
show that Dodd considered Mr. Milligan as 
only belonging to the political, or rather, the 
silly aiy;! harmless branch of the order? al- 
though he had appointed him a Major Gen- 
eral, and hoped to inveigle him into his plots! 
I earnestly submit to you, as rational and im- 
partial judges, that tliis one circumstance is 
a complete refutation of the wliole charge that 
Mr. Milligan was a party to Dodd's proposed 
conspiracy. 



But, to return: what, I inquire, was the pur- 
pose of calling these men together, if the plan 
had already been agreed upon? Why, especially, 
keep Mr. Milligan in ignorance of the matter? 
Why insti'uct the messenger to keep him in 
the dark? Did Dodd mistrust his messenger? 
AVas he unwilling to intrust so important a 
secret to him? The evidence informs us, that 
he had already imparted the whole matter to 
him ; he must, therefore, have regarded his mes- 
senger as trusty. Then it will be remembered 
that the prosecution insists, that, according to 
the constitution of this order, the members 
were to implicitly obey the commands of the 
Grand Commander; I ask, then, if this scheme 
had been agreed upon, where was the necessity 
of calling these men together? He could have 
assigned to each his duty, and implicit obedi- 
ence must be the result. 

But, possibly, the prosecution will abandon 
its theory as to the supreme power of the 
Grand Commander. Because, if insurrection 
had been one of the purposes of the order, 
why try to keep Mr. Milligan ignorant of a 
fact which, of necessity, he must have known? 
and why impose secrecy upon the messenger, 
Mr. Harrison? This, I think, not only shows 
how the members of the order, but also how 
the Grand Commander understood that part 
of the obligation which pledged them to obe- 
dience. Thus, when we come to look at the 
case as judges and lawyers, and not as mere 
partisans, we find that there has been proven 
no such complete agreement, as is necessary 
under the law of conspiracy, even on the part 
of Dodd, much less on the part of Mr. Milli- 
gan, who knew nothing of it until it had died 
from want of sympathy on the part of those 
whose approval was to give it vital force. 

Were it necessary, I might, without impro- 
priety, refer to the cloud of suspicion through 
which the testimony of Stidger, Zumro, Heff"- 
ren and Wilson came to us. The two former 
stand in the execrable light of informers; 
the latter, in the equally odious light of ac- 
complices, purchasing their own immunity at 
the expense of their former alleged confeder- 
ates; the former have ever been regarded with 
scorn and abhorrence, while the latter have al- 
ways, by all honorable minds, been character- 
ized as infamous. Let Hefi'ren pass — "room 
for the leper, room!" Of Wilson, I scarcely 
know how to speak — he is self-accused and 
self condemned. Contrast him, if you please, 
wit) J the honorable bearing of my client, and 
it ought to make the "blush of shame" crim- 
son even the check of Wilson. He came to the 
witness stand with traitors' money under his 
control, and loaned out to his friends — he 
came and confessed to the treason, as well as 
to the ineffable meanness of accepting, from 
the hands of his country's enemies, the piti- 
ful sum of his expenses to and from Chicago. 
And yet, this double-dyed traitor — traitor to 
his own country, according to his own show- 
ing, and, for the sake of purchasing his own 
release, traitor to his former alleged confed- 
erates — is to go forth to the world, duly in- 
dorsed by the Government as honest and cred- 
ible; for, I understand, it asks you to believe 
him. Oh! kind and parental Administration, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS 



245 



that allows the confessed traitor to go un- 
punished, that it may wreak its vengeance 
upon a mere political opponent! 

No Court, either in ancient or modern times, 
has allowed the conviction of an individual 
upon the uncorroborated testimony of accom- 
plices. Mr. Greenleaf, in speaking of this 
kind of evidence, says: "The case of accom- 
plices is usually mentioned under the head of 
infamy." Greenl. Eu., ^ 379. 

Mr. Starkiesays: "With respect to the force 
and effect of such testimony, it must, from its 
very nature, be regarded with jealousy and 
suspicion." "It is hard," Lord Hale observes, 
"to take away the life of any person upon the 
evidence of a pariiceps criyninis, unless there be 
very considerable circumstances which may 
give the greater credit to what he swears. 

"In strictness of law, indeed, a prisoner 
may be convicted on the testimony of a single 
accomplice, since, where competent evidence 
is adduced, it is for the jury to determine the 
effect of that evidence. But in- practice it is 
usual to direct the jury to acquit the prisoner, 
when the evidence of an accomplice stands 
uncorroborated in material circumstances, 
but this, it is said, is a matter resting entirely 
within the discretion of the Courts." 2 Stark. 
Hv., p. 12. 

"But," says Mr. Phillips, "though accom- 
plices are received as witnesses, their testi- 
mony ought to be received by a jury with a 
sober degree of jealousy and caution, for on 
their own confession they stand contamin- 
ated with guilt, and in the hope of lessening 
their own infamy, will often be tempted to 
throw as much guilt as possible upon the pris- 
oner. They may also, in some cases, be en- 
titled to rewards on the prisoner's conviction, 
and in all cases expected to earn a pardon, 
and as fear is usually their motive, the same 
feeling may tempt them to exaggerate their 
evidence for the purpose of destroying their 
former associate and securing themselves 
against his vengeance." 1 Phillips' Uv., 29. 

"But their testimony alone is seldom of suf- 
ficient weight with a jury to convict the of- 
fenders, the temptation to commit pei-jury 
being so great, where the witness, by accusing 
another, may escape himself. The practice, 
therefore, is to advise the jury to regard the 
evidence of an accomplice only so far as he is 
confirmed, in some part of his testimony, by 
unimpeachable testimony." lb., p. 32. 

"The degree of credit," Mr. Greenleaf says, 
"which ought to be given to an accomplice, is 
a matter exclusively within the province of 
the jury. It has sometimes been said that 
they ought not to believe him unless his testi- 
mony is corroborated by other evidence; and, 
without doubt, great caution in weighing such 
testimony, is dictated by prudence and good 
reason. But there is no such rule of law, it 
being expressly conceded that the jury may, 
if they please, act on the evidence of the ac- 
complice without any confirmation of his 
statement. But, on the other hand, judges, in 
their discretion, will advise a jury not to con- 
vict of felony upon the testimony of an ac- 
complice alone, and without corroboration, 
and it is now so generally the practice to give 



them such advice, that its omission would be 
regarded as an omission of duty on the part of 
the judge. And, considering the respect always 
paid by the jury to this advice from the bench, 
it may be regarded as the settled course of 
practice not to convict a prisoner, in any case 
of felony, upon the sole and uncorroborated 
testimony of an accomplice." 1 Greenl. En., 
I 380. 

"Judges," observed Lord Ellenborough, 
"will advise a jury not to believe an accom- 
plice, unless he is confirmed, or only in so far 
as he is confirmed, but if he is believed, his 
testimony is unquestionably to establish tho 
facts he deposes. Jones' case, 2 Camp., 132. 
So, where, on an indictment for highway rob- 
bery, an accomplice only was called, the Court, 
though it admitted such evidence was legal, 
thought it too dangerous to permit a convic- 
tion to take place, and the prisoners were ac- 
quitted. Jones ^ Davis' case, 1 Leach, 479. 
The practice, therefore, is for the Court to di- 
rect the jury in such cases to acquit the pris- 
oner, unless, in some respects, the evidence is 
confirmed. Roscoe's Crim. Ev.,p. 156. 

" It is usual for a Court to advise a jury not 
to regard the evidence of an accomplice, un- 
less he is confirmed in some part of his testi- 
mony by unimpeachable testimony. If con- 
firmed in some parts, he may be believed in 
others." U. S. vs. Kipler, 1 Bald. C. G. R., 22 

I might stop here and rest the defense with 
propriety, but some might regard my duty in- 
complete, and ask if Mr. Milligan's alleged 
position as a Major General in the order had 
been satisfactorily disposed of? That is an 
easy task. For the sake of argument, we will 
admit that he was appointed a Major General; 
but where is the evidence that he ever accepted 
that appointment, or that he other than treated 
it with merited contempt? I answer, there is 
none whatever. But perhaps it is proposed to 
invert the usual order of criminal jurispru- 
dence, and hold him guilty unless he proves 
himself innocent. Even in that case we are 
not without the necessary proof; indeed, we 
are prepared for almost any rule. Mr. Iljach 
informs us that at the Grand Council, in June, 
1864, it was stated that the gentlemen who 
had been appointed Major Generals, had not 
accepted, and that it was agreed in Grand 
Council, that, if they did not accept by the 
ensuing 4th of July, others should be ap- 
pointed in their stead. Indeed there is no 
credible testimony, but only an inference, 
that he ever knew of his appointment. Mr. 
Harrison states that the first appointment was 
in September, 1863, and it is not pretended 
that Mr. Milligan was at that meeting ; nor 
was he ever informed of it in any oflBcial man- 
ner, as the Grand Secretary, Mr. Harrison, 
informs us. The same witness also states that 
Mr. Milligan was again elected a Major General 
at the February Grand Council; but this was 
also during his absence. True, Heffren states 
that Milligan was at that Grand Council, but 
this is only another indication of the utter 
unworthiness of his testimony, for we have 
the evidence of Messrs. Bingham, Daily, Mo- 
ses Milligan, Loughridge and Winters, all 
corroborating Harrison and impeaching Heff- 



246 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



ren. Can they all be mistaken ? Mr. Daily, 
who is a practicing attorney at Huntington, 
informs us that the Court at that place was 
then in session, and that Mr. Milligan was 
there. Moses Milligan, who was a court bail- 
iff, gives us like testimony. Bingham swears 
that Mr. Milligan was not there. Judge 
Loughridge, a delegate to the Council, in- 
quired for him, and found he was not present, 
and finally, Mr. Winters, a gentleman from 
Mr. Milligan's town, tells us that they both 
bought railroad tickets for Indianapolis, but, 
owing to the crowded state of the cars when 
they arrived at Huntington, Mr. Milligan re- 
fused to go, and did not go. That he (wit- 
ness) went, and that inquiry was made of him 
for the reason of Milligan's absence. Stidger 
states that the roll of Major Generals was 
called at the June Council; but, Mr. Ibach, 
the delegate from Huntington, who went there 
with Milligan, contradicts this, and makes 
the reasonable statement that if any one from 
his own town had been named a Major Gen- 
eral, he would have observed it. But for the 
Bake of argument, let us suppose that he ac- 
cepted the sounding title of Major General, 
yet what was it more than a mere intended 
compliment, or titular dignification ? Thus 
the titles, " Grand Commander," " Sergeant 
of the Guard," etc., etc., are terms of high 
import in a lodge of "Sons of Malta," and 
yet the recipients of these " blushing honors " 
were never, for that cause, considered trait- 
ors, although the crder was "military in its 
character." The title of " King " is one of 
high signification, and ordinarily means 
much; and the office of "King" is contrary 
to the Constitution and laws of the United 
States ; and yet, who ever thought of holding 
an individual guilty of a crime because of his 
accepting and exercising the office of King in 
a Chapter of Royal Arch Masons ! It is going 
back to those days of constructive treason, 
Avhen a man was hanged for dreaming that he 
had made his son heir to the crown, although 
that was the name of his Inn; and another, whose 
favorite buck had been killed by the King, for 
wishing that the deer, horns and all, were in 
the King's belly. 4 Black. Com., p. 80. Names 
do not always signify the same thing — a Ma- 
jor General in the army is a position well un- 
derstood, and having well defined duties ; 
but tell me, if you please, what were the 
duties of a Major General in the Sons of Lib- 
erty ? Where is the evidence of any assigned 
duties ? Mere high-sounding names are not 
evidence. Men's lives are not to be forfeited 
by the inconsiderate use of such flimsy stuff. 

It is next insisted that Mr. Milligan made a 
speech at a Democratic mass meeting at Fort 
Wayne, on the 13th of August last; in wliich 
it is claimed that he uttered disloyal senti- 
ments, urged resistance to the draft, and at- 
tempted to incite insurrection. When we ask 
for the proof of all this, we are referred to the 
testimony of an itinerant news gatherer of 
the Cincinnati Oazetle (and which, he says, is 
not a partisan paper), who was there hunting, 
a.t "a penny a line," for some item to be used 
against the Democratic party, in that political 
contest. True, he would have you believe that 



the speech was very disloyal; but against this, 
we have the testimony of honorable witnesses, 
Messrs. Bird and Winters, who heard the 
speech throughout (Mr. Winters having re- 
ported it for his paper), who swear there was 
nothing saidin itcalculated to incite resistance 
to the draft, or which counseled insurrection ; 
that the speech was a dry, able, and argumen- 
tative one, characterized by moderation and 
respectful language toward his opponents ; 
that he dealt in no denunciation of the Gov- 
ernment, as Mr. Bush would have you believe, 
but made a broad distinction between the 
Government and the Administration. NjO in- 
surrection followed that speech. True, he 
argued in favor of the doctrine of State Sov- 
ereignty. And suppose he did. It is no new 
doctrine, but is as old as the Constitution. 
The great and good men of America have ad- 
vocated the same ideas, and yet were uncon- 
scious of committing any crime in doing so. 
On that very basis our Government was ad- 
ministered for sixty years with most unpar- 
alleled success. But suppose the party in 
power does deem it a political heresy; is 
heresy of political opinion a crime in this 
country ? Who is to be the judge of the ques- 
tion of what is heresy of opinion ? Shall it 
be the party in power ? Then it would be 
very easy for them to perpetuate that power, 
by condemning all their political opponents 
to the halter, as traitors. Liberty of speech 
would then consist in the right to say, freely, 
what the Administration dictated. It was a 
wise remark of Jefferson, that "Error of opin- 
ion may well be tolerated as long as reason is 
left free to combat it." 

But it ought not to be expected that gentle- 
men of the age, firmness, honesty and intelli- 
gence of Mr. Milligan, can change their 
honest convictions upon political questions to 
suit the views of the Administration, brought 
into power, perhaps, by a mere changeling 
mob. But are we to be held criminally re- 
sponsible for a political speech, addressed to 
a political meeting in the course of a political 
campaign, even though it be bitter and de- 
nunciatory in its terms? Were it so, half the 
political speakers in the United States would 
then deserve hanging. I have only contempt 
to express for such a proposition. Once ad- 
mit that principle, and probably at the next 
change of administration the gentlemen be- 
fore me would have to change places with Mr. 
Milligan. If American citizens can not, in a 
cool, calm and respectful manner, criticise the 
acts of their public servants, in a canvass for 
their re-election, it is time they should be in- 
formed of the new order of things. 

The next thing that claims our considera- 
tion is a letter from Mr. Milligan to General 
Dodd. It is claimed that addressing Dodd as 
General, is an acknowledgment of acquaint- 
ance with his military character, and of fa- 
miliarity with what ia termed the military 
branch of the order. But has it any such 
significance? Titles are cheap things now-a- 
days. In this country they do not preclude 
even the party using them from showing that 
they are improperly used. Thus, the titles, 
'Squire and Judge, are not unfrequently ap- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



247 



plied to loafers; and how often, indeed, do we 
hear individuals called Colonel, upon whose 
shoulders the "Eagle Bird" has never rested; 
while the prefix of "Hon." has now little or no 
meaning beyond compliment. 

In this letter, Mr. Milligan is writing as a 
politician, his name having been presented as 
a candidate for Governor; he was not writing 
as a Son of Liberty. That the appellation, 
General, was only used in compliment, is cor- 
roborated by the fact that Dodd was not Gen- 
eral in, but Grand Commander of, the Sons of 
Liberty. If Mr. Milligan had been referring 
to Dodd's ofiScial position in the order, he 
would have addressed him as "Most Eminent 
Grand Commander." I ask the indulgence of 
the Commission while I examine this letter a 
little further. It has been introduced in evi- 
. denee, and we can not anticipate the uses to 
which the learned Judge Advocate will at- 
tempt to apply it. The letter is a confidential 
answer to another, in which the writer states 
his grief on account of the desertion of sup- 
posed friends, and the consequent lessening 
of his political hopes. One or two expressions 
I will briefly notice. First, he expresses his 
willingness "to do whatever the cause of the 
North-west may require;" and then that other 
sentence, in which he says, "what will those 
of less pretension do when the real contest 
comes, when life and property depend upon 
the issue, when bullets instead of ballots are 
cast, and when the halter is a preamble to our 
platform? For unless Federal encroachments 
are arrested in the States by the effort as well 
of the Legislative as of the Executive, then 
will our lives and fortunes follow where our 
honors will have gone before." It seems from 
this that he was looking to legitimate sources, 
to-wit, the Legislative and Executive authority 
of the State, for the arrest of apprehended 
encroachments. 

His expressions of sympathy for the North- 
west, I contend, are shared in, to a great ex- 
tent, by men of all parties, who have felt that 
her interests have, by partial legislation, been 
made to pay tribute to those of New England. 
Indeed, it was quite a common expression 
among many members of the party with which 
Mr. Milligan acted, that the burdens of the 
war were not equally distributed, and that the 
Eastern States had not responded to the calls 
for volunteers with the same alacrity that had 
distinguished the Noi-th-west. Indeed, it will 
be remembered, that, previous to the date of 
that letter, public attention was frequently 
directed by the public journals to the alleged 
fact, that while Indiana was putting her 118th 
Regiment into the field, Massachusetts, with a 
population about equal to that of this State, 
was recruiting negroes in Indiana to fill up 
her 54th Regiment. With the justice of these 
comparisons we have, in the present inquiry, 
nothing to do, but only with the fact that such 
complaints were made. Mr. Milligan was 
then seeking office at the hands of those who 
uttered them, and the expression meant, 
simply, that if he was elected Governor, he 
would only ask Indiana to do her just part; 
it ^.ertainly had no reference to a Noi'th-west- 
ern Confederacy. As to the expression about 



the halter being a preamble to the platform, 
etc., it is clearly referable to a reported 
declaration, said to have been made in a pub- 
lic speech, by our State Executive, shortly be- 
fore that time, that those leading opponents 
of the Administration would come to grief, 
and their families suffer want. Whether or 
not the declaration was ever made, is unim- 
portant in this inquiry; for, whether true or 
false, it was so published, and explains the 
phraseology of this portion of the letter. 

And thus closes the last circumstance and 
the last inquiry, leaving this unhallowed 
prosecution without a stay or support. 

After an investigation, occupying a period 
of about two months, the prosecution having 
failed to establish, by evidence, a single one 
of the inculpatory circumstances charged 
against Mr. Milligan, I am at a loss to know 
upon what principle of law, morality, or 
justice, he is detained in a loathsome prison, 
under circumstances of extreme hardship. 
This may, perhaps, be considered strong lan- 
guage, but knowing personally all the cir- 
cumstances of the case, I must say that his 
arrest and confinement, considering his char- 
acter, his physical condition, the health of his 
family, and the offer of his friends to give 
bail in any sum that might be asked for his 
appearance, does not accord with that degree 
of civilization which should characterize a 
great people. Never was a citizen more vin- 
dictively pursued. Every principle held sa- 
cred among honorable men has been violated 
by those following his track. Professional 
confidence, ever heretofore held sacred, has 
been prostituted to manufacture evidence 
against him. His kindly sympathies were 
aroused by a villain, who only sought to 
betray and ruin him. Private and confi- 
dential correspondence has been seized and 
introduced, in the vain hope of finding 
some inadvertent treason. And yet what 
has been discovered? What fatal act or 
word has been found? It is in evidence that, 
nearly a year ago, Zumro was placed on his 
track (and I am compelled to give its authors 
credit for the completeness of their plan) — 
Zumro, who was his neighbor and acquaint- 
ance! In order to more effectually blind Mr. 
Milligan, Zumro was arrested by the military 
authorities, and, as a part of the plan, em- 
ployed his unsuspecting victim, who is a lead- 
ing lawyer of the State, to defend him; and 
yet, during all the sacred and confidential in- 
tercourse existing between attorney and cli- 
ent, when all restraint is ordinarily thrown 
off, not a word, not even a murmur against 
the Government escaped his lips. That ear 
that was paid to listen with aching interest 
for some unguarded remark, never caught 
even a whisper of discontent; until finally, 
when on a bed of perilous sickness — the bed 
from which he was dragged to his present 
dungeon — while delirious with disease and 
drugs — that spy and informer goes to him in 
the hopes of hearing some treasonable ex- 
pression escape him in his wild and incohe- 
rent ravings. 

And now, forgetting for awhile his terrible 
impeachment, let us look his evidence full in 



248 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



the face. With insinuating manner, he squats 
beside that bed of sickness, and asks, "What 
is the order going to do about the draft?" to 
■which Mr. Milligan replies, "Nothing; there 
are no fighting men about Huntington." But, 
unwilling to give it up, for his pay was 
shining before his greedy vision, with lying 
tongue he says, "we are going to resist it if 
we get assistance from here;" to which, he in- 
forms us, Mr. Milligan replied, "It is as good 
a time as any," and that "if he was well and 
in the woods, he could kill twenty before 
they could take him." But in this, as in every 
thing else, he is impeached by Mr. Johnson, a 
respectable farmer, who was present and 
heard the whole conversation. Infamous be- 
ing! May God help you, and never allow 
your children to know the deep damnation of 
your infamy; else, from utter shame, they will 
become vagabonds and outlaws on the earth. 
I have done; and now, Mr. President and 
officers of the Commission, I commit the cause 
of my client to you. I have known him long 
and intimately. For fourteen years we have 
practiced at the same bar, and commingled in 
its kindly and fraternal intercourse. With 
his extreme political views I have held no 
sympathy — for the Sons of Liberty I have 
had no respect; but I never will believe that 
Mr. Milligan, either in act or heart, is a 
traitor. His life has already measured the 
span of fifty-two years, the last twenty of 
which have been spent in this State. With 



"an unblemished reputation" (as the evi- 
dence shows,) a good, kind and affectionate 
wife, a comfortable home, devoted friends, and 
an enlarged and cultivated mind, he might, 
in ordinary times, laugh to scorn a charge s-c 
preposterous. 

To you, gentlemen, I commit his reputation, 
his liberty and his life; and, higher than all, 
gentlemen, there is committed to you the duty 
of respecting that sacred right — the trial by 
jury. Better let these defendants go, even 
should you deem them guilty, than to strike 
at that glorious old bulwark of liberty! It 
was in defense of it that Hampden fell, that 
Sidney bled, that Washington fought, and 
for which the battle fields of our holy Revolu- 
tion were incarnadined with the best blood 
of our patriot fathers. Shall we forget the 
lessons of history? Is the emergency so 
great? is our nation in such deadly peril? 
and have we become so insane, as to think we 
can save its life by cutting out its very vitals? 
If it can be saved only by the sacrifice of con- 
stitutional liberty, and the inalienable rights 
of our race, I say let it die. But no, no, it is 
not so. The God of our fathers will not for- 
sake us. True, this nation is sick, very sick — 
the mailed hand of a foul rebellion has been 
grappling at its throat, but even now the arm 
is becoming weak and palsied. Then, while 
we strike at the fell fiend of treason, let us be 
careful that our dagger may not, in our blind 
fury, reach the dear idol of our hopes. 



REPLY OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE. 



Gentlemen of the Commission: 

In closing this trial, it becomes my duty to 
reply to the able addresses or arguments made 
on behalf of the accused by their counsel. 

These trials have been in progress now since 
the nineteenth day of September. It has been 
one long, continuous labor, exhausting to the 
Court, to the counsel for the defense, and cer- 
tainly to myself. The labor that has been 
required to develop the facts given to this 
Court, few will ever know, or appreciate. The 
responsibility of giving to you the facts in- 
volved in this issue, and the correct law, so 
far as I was able, during nearly a three months' 
struggle, has been solely upon my shoulders, 
unaided. I beg the Court, therefore, to look 
charitably upon those eiforts wherein I have 
failed to do the cause of the Government full 
justice. While I yield to many, to the counsel 
for the accused, greater experience, learning 
and ability, I can, and do claim to be the peer of 
any man in my love of country, love of her glo- 
rious institutions, and in my desire and inflex- 
ible determination to deal justly with all 
men. 

In discussing this question, I hope to say no 
word that is not fully warranted by the law 
and the evidence. There is certainly no bit- 
terness in my heart toward any of these 
accused; they are -all alike strangers to nie. 
Their counsel have, in the conduct of the de- 
fense, ever been high-toned, gallant, courteous 
gentlemen, able advocates, and learned in the 
law. 

In meeting the question of the jurisdiction 
of this Court, I shall make no plea or apology 
for the President, or the Commanding General 
of this District. I shall claim that the Presi- 
dent, in issuing his proclamation declaring 
martial law, suspending the writ of habeas 
corpus, and making this class of offenses 
punishable by a military tribunal, acted in 
conformity to the law, and within the pro- 
visions of the Constitution ; that his acts were 
warranted and sanctioned by the Constitution; 
and that had he done less than he has done, 
he would have performed less than his whole 
duty — he would not have taken "care that 
the laws were faithfully executed," and would 
have been unworthy to be the Chief Executive 
of this great nation, and the Commander-in- 
Chief of her armies. Had the Commanding 
General of this District permitted this con- 
spiracy to ripen, to move forward to its cul- 
mination, or even to sleep for the time being, 
iintil, iEtna-like, it belched forth upon a 
sleeping people its glowing, seething, red tide 
of fire and blood, without grappling it and 
its leaders with the strong military arm, he 



would have been an Arnold, instead of the 
brave soldier and patriot he is. 

This Court has jurisdiction in these cases, 
and has a right to hear, and pass sentences. 

First. Because it has been expressly clothed 
with that right and power by the authority 
competent to give them; and 

Second. Because, were no such formal power 
conveyed, the "laws of war," the military lex 
non scripta, and the necessity of the present 
crisis, would clothe this Court with jurisdiction 
to try this class of offenses. 

Then as to the express authority. In Gen- 
eral Orders No. 141, of the War Department, 
dated September '25th, 1862, will be found the 
proclamation of the President, which reads 
as follows: 

War Depaetment, Adjutant General's OrncE, ) 
Washnigton, September 26, 1862, j 

General Orders No. 141. 

The following proclamation by the President 
is published for the information and govern- 
ment of the Army, and all concerned: 

BT THE PRESIDENT OF THE TJNITED STATES OF AMERICA — 
A PROCLAMATION. 

Whereas, It has become necessary to call 
into service not only volunteers, but also por- 
tions of the militia of the States by draft, in or- 
der to suppress the insurrection existing in the 
United States, and disloyal persons are not ad- 
equately restrained by the ordinary processes 
of law from hindering this measure, and from 
giving aid and comfort in various ways to the 
insurrection; now, therefore, be it ordered: 

First. That during the existing insurrection, 
and as a necessary measure for suppressing 
the same, all rebels and insurgents, their aiders 
and abettors, within the United States, and all 
persons discouraging volunteer enlistments, 
resisting militia drafts, or guilty of any dis- 
loyal practice, affording aid and comfort to 
the rebels against the authority of the United 
States, shall be subject to martial law, and 
liable to trial and punishment by courts-mar- 
tial or military commission. 

Second. That the writ of habeas corpus is sus- 
pended in respect to all persons arrested, or 
who are now or hereafter during the rebellion 
shall be imprisoned in any fort, camp, arsenal, 
military prison or other place of confinement, 
by a«y military authority, or by the sentence 
of any court-martial or military commission. 

In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my 
hand, and caused the seal of the United States 
to be affixed. 

Done at the City of Washington, this twenty- 

P -| fourth day of September,in the year 

'-■■-' of our Lord 'one thousand eight 
249 



250 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



hundred and sixty-two, and of the independ- 
ence of the United States the eighty-seventh. 
ABRAHAM LINCOLN. 

By the President: 

William H. Seward, Secretary of State. 

By order of the Secretary of War: 

L. Thomas, Adjutant General. 

This proclamation, it will be seen, covers 
many of the offenses set forth in the charges 
and specifications. It expressly says "that 
during the existing insurrection, and as a 
necessary measure for suppressing the same, 
all rebels and insurgents, their aiders and 
abettors within the United States, and all per- 
sons discouraging volunteer enlistments, re- 
sisting militia drafts, or guilty of any disloyal 
practice, affording aid and comfort to rebels 
against the authority of the United States, 
shall be subject to martial law, and liable to 
trial and punishment by court-martial." 

To settle the question of jurisdiction beyond 
all doubt, this Court has but to determine 
whether the President had the power and the 
right, under the Constitution, to issue this 
proclamation. If he had that right as the 
executive arm of the Government, or as Com- 
mander-in-Chief of her armies, then Congress 
could in no wise interfere with, or take from 
a co-ordinate branch of the Government one 
of its constitutional prerogatives. For it is 
admitted of all men, that within the limits 
prescribed by the Constitution, each branch 
or department of the Government is su- 
preme, and free of control or dictation from 
either of the others. The question then re- 
curs, had the President the right to suspend 
the civil law, and put in force martial law, as 
against the class of offenders designated in 
the paragraph just quoted? I do not under- 
stand that the gentleman contends against, or 
even questions the authority of a commanding 
general in the field to declare martial law. In 
fact, the gentleman who has argued the ques- 
tion of jurisdiction in this case, Mr. Gordon, 
well stated, in the Dodd case, that the army, 
wherever it moves, carries martial law with it, 
without any proclamation. The proclamation, 
as a general rule, is but the giving notice of 
a fact which already exists. Then, if a com- 
manding general in the field may, within the 
theater of his military operations, or within 
the lines of his military command, declare 
and enforce martial law, who shall be the 
judge of when and under what circumstances 
this shall be done ? Certainly the military 
commander himself. It is one of the rights 
and powers incident to his military position. 
An army would be powerless could its opera- 
tions be hindered and stopped by the processes 
of civil courts. Could the soldiers of an army 
be taken from its ranks by habeas corpus, how 
long, think you, could any army hold together? 
If by injunction you could stop the erection 
of fortifications, or the destruction of private 
property, of what efficiency would be the 
movements of your army? The nearer you 
approach perfect, arbitrary power, in the gov- 
ernment of an army, the greater the efficiency 
and power of that army. To make it effective, 
it must be as nearly as possible one will, one 
intelligence, governing and giving direction 



to the entire physical force under its control; 
and just in proportion as you distract and 
divide that will, that intelligence, you distract 
and divide the strength and efficiency of that 
army. 

The operations of the civil law, of the civil 
courts, and the full enjoyment of civil rights, 
are entirely inconsistent with, and opposed to, 
the operations of an ai-my. The rights of war 
and the rights of peace are antagonistic, and 
can not co-exist; one must yield to the other. 
The laws of war and the laws of peace can not 
operate at one and the same time upon the same 
subject-matter; one must take precedence, and 
the other remain in abeyance. When a war is 
once in esse, the civil courts will take judicial 
notice of the fact, they should themselves give 
way, and yield to this new order of things. 
It is only in great emergencies that the armies 
of a nation are called into the field, that war 
is inaugurated; and when war is once inau- 
gurated, it is the great, all-absorbing, vital 
question to that nation. Upon the success of 
its arms depend its national glory, the full 
enjoyment of the rights of its people, and, 
generally, its continuance as a government. 
Therefore, and for this reason, the civil rights 
of individuals, the powers and duties exercised 
by civil courts, for the time being, yield to this 
greater and more important interest. The 
commanding general, duly empowered as such, 
when in the field, has placed upon him great 
duties and high responsibilities. His power 
should be adequate to, and coextensive with 
his duties and responsibilities. He may then, 
if he deem it necessary for the success of the 
opei-ations of his army, without its being 
claimed, it seems to me, by any person, to be 
a violation of any of the provisions of the 
Constitution, declare and enforce martial law; 
he may, at his will, if he deem it necessary, 
arrest any person within his military limits, 
or within the theater of his military opera- 
tions. If he may arrest one, upon the same hy- 
pothesis he may arrest a thousand. The num- 
ber is limited only by the necessity. While 
the Constitution says no man shall be deprived 
of life, liberty, or property, without due pro- 
cess of law, yet it can not, and would not be 
claimed that this would be an unconstitutional 
exercise of his power. And why? Simply 
because this clause of the Constitution does 
not refer to this emergency; it has reference 
to times of peace, to the normal condition of 
the country. So while private property, under 
the Constitution, is to be held inviolate, no 
man will contend but that a military com- 
mander may seize, at his will, all the forage 
and provisions necessary for the subsistence 
of his army, and any thing necessary for its 
transportation, or enter upon any realty nec- 
essary for the encampment of his troops, or 
use any amount of private property necessary 
for constructing fortifications. He may turn 
his guns upon the residence of any citizen, 
loyal though he may be, if it harbor the enemy, 
or if its removal would render the movements 
of his army more efficient. He may seize 
steamers and vessels for transportation; he 
may blow up bridges and forts; burn and de- 
stroy towns and cities; and this power is none 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



251 



the less perfect and unlimited from the fact 
that the property taken or destroyed is that 
of a friend, instead of an enemy. Upon this 
point, Solicitor Whiting, in his pamphlet upon 
"The War Powers of the President," has well 
said: 

"While war is raging, many of the rights 
Held sacred by the Constitution — rights which 
can not be violated by any acts of Congress — 
may and must be suspended and held in abey- 
ance. If this were not so, the Government 
might itself be destroyed ; the army and 
navy might be sacrificed, and one part of the 
Constitution would nullify the rest. 

"If freedom of speech can not be suppressed, 
spies can not be caught, imprisoned and 
hung. 

"If freedom of the press can not be interfered 
with, all our military plans may be betrayed 
to the enemy. 

"If no man can be deprived of life without trial 
by jury, a soldier can not slay the enemy in 
battle. 

"If enemy'' s property can not be taken without 
'due process of law,' how can the soldier 
disarm his foe and seize his weapons ? 

"If no person can be arrested, sentenced, 
and shot, without trial by jury in the county 
or State where his crime is alleged to have 
been committed, how can a deserter he shot, or 
a spy be hung, or an enemy be taken prisoner ? 

"It has been said that '■amidst arms the laws 
are silent.' It would be more just to say, that 
while war rages, the rights which in peace 
are sacred, must and do give way to the higher 
right — the right of pn/blic safety — the right 
which the country, the whole country, claims, to 
be protected from its enemies, domestic and 
foreign — from spies, conspirators, and from 
traitors. The sovereign and almost dictato- 
rial powers — existing only in actual war; 
ending when war ends — to be used in self- 
defense, and to" be laid down when the occa- 
sion has passed, are, while they last, as lawful, 
as constitutional, as sacred, as the administration 
of justice by judicial courts in times of peace. 
They may be dangerous; war itself is danger- 
ous ; but danger does not make them uncon- 
stitutional. If the Commander-in-Chief or- 
ders the army to seize the arms and ammu- 
nition of the enemy; to capture their per- 
sons; to shell out their batteries; to hang 
spies, or shoot deserters; to destroy the 
armed enemy in open battle; to send traitors 
to forts and prisons; to stop the press from 
aiding and comforting the enemy by be- 
traying our military plans; to arrest within 
our lines, or wherever they can be seized, 
persons against whom there is reasonable 
evidence of their having aided or abetted the 
rebels, or of intending so to do — the preten- 
sion that in so doing he is violating the Con- 
stitution, is not onh' erroneous, but it is a plea 
in behalf of treason. To set up the rules of 
civil administration, as overriding and con- 
trolling the laws of war, is to aid and abet 
the enemy. It falsifies the clear meaning of 
the Constitution, which not only gives the 
' power, but makes it the plain duty of the Pre- 
sident, to go to war with the enemy of his 
country. And the restraints to which he is 



subject when in war, are not to be found in the 
municipal regulations, which can be adminis- 
tered only in peace, but in the laws and 
usages of nations regulating the conduct of 
war." 

Then, while these powers are conceded to 
a subordinate military commander in the 
field, with what consistency can they be 
denied to his superior, the Commander-in- 
Chief of all the armies? Is the inferior 
greater in power than the superior ? Is the 
servant greater than the master ? The supe- 
rior may order the inferior, his junior in 
rank, to suspend the civil law and declare 
martial law. He may abrogate and set aside 
the proclamation of an inferior commander 
declaring martial law. All the acts of the 
inferior, the subordinate commander, receive 
their force, and have vitality only as they are 
supposed to emanate from and receive the 
sanction of the military superior, the Com- 
mander-in-Chief. Under the Constitution, 
the Commander-in-Chief appoints all these 
officers; and when the Constitution says that 
the President of the United States "shall be 
Commander-in-Chief of the army and navy," 
that provision carries with it all the necessary 
power incident to such office. 

Then it having once been admitted that the 
subordinate military commander can do these 
acts, the only question that can arise, is, 
under what circumstances can he thus act ? 
First, then, who is to be the judge of when the 
necessity exists for the Commander-in-Chief 
to issue his proclamation of martial law, or 
when he shall declare that martial law does 
exist? 

We have seen that in the field, the subordi- 
nate military commander is, and can alone 
be the sole judge of that necessity; and he 
will be held to a high accountability for the 
exercise of a sound discretion in the use of 
this despotic power. For a wanton, or unwar- 
ranted exercise of it, he could be tried before 
a military tribunal ; or on the restoration of 
peace, he could be held answerable by the 
aggrieved persons, before a civil tribunal. 
The only limit to this power in the hands of 
the subordinate commander, is the existence 
of the necessity; he being the judge of the 
necessity within his own military limits. No 
stronger rules, or greater limitations, of 
course, would obtain as against the Comman- 
der-in-Chief. If, under the existence of a 
great and overpowering necessity, it is con- 
stitutional and lawful for a subordinate com- 
mander to declare and enforce martial law, 
under the same circumstances, and with the 
same necessity, the Commander-in-Chief can 
constitutionally and legally declare and 
enfoi-ce martial law. It is not as President 
of the United States, not as the Chief Execu- 
tive of a great nation, that he exercises this 
power, this despotic and arbitrary power, 
but it is as the Commander-in-Chief of her 
armies in time of war, made such by the 
express provisions of the Constitution itself. 

In his judgment, that necessity existed in 
18G2. For a wanton, or unwarranted exer- 
cise of that power, he could have been im- 
peached and tried by the Senate. He was the 



252 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS, 



sole judge of that necessity. If he had thought 
the necessity for it existed, he couhl have 
issued his proclamation for the civil law and 
civil courts to be entirely suspended through- 
out the land ; or in part, only, as the neces- 
sity demanded. In these Northern States, 
where branches of the army were operating, 
where the civil authorities, though weak, and 
often needing help from the military arm, 
were yet dominant, as Commander-in-Chief, 
the President ha^ said that to "rebel insur- 
gents, their aiders and abettors, and all per- 
sons discouraging volunteer enlistments, re- 
sisting militia drafts, or guilty of any dis- 
loyal practice, affording aid and comfort to 
rebels against the authority of the United 
States," the civil law shall be silent, and that, 
as to them, martial law shall obtain. In all 
other respects, the civil courts are open and 
the civil law is in full force. 

The counsel, in arguing this question of ju- 
risdiction, has treated the subject, at all times, 
as though the President, in putting in opera- 
tion the martial law, must entirely subvert and 
set aside the civil law and its tribunals. 
This is an error. If he have the right to do 
it in whole, he can do it in part; the greater 
includes the less. 

His military lines, as Commander-in-Chief 
of the armies of the United States, and the 
theater of the military operations of those 
armies, are coextensive with the geographical 
lines of the country. Can the gentlemen 
point to any State or Territory that is not to- 
day the theater of vast military operations? 
He has cited this State. 

Of the extent of military operations here, 
of all interests affecting the public welfare, 
this Court has a right, without proof, to take 
judicial notice. On that subject, Greenleaf, 
vol. 1st, page 7, says: 

"In like manner, the Law of Nations, and 
the general customs and usages of merchants, 
as well as the public statutes and general 
laws and customs of their own country, as 
well ecclesiastical as civil, are recognized, 
without proof, by the courts of all civilized 
nations. * * * * * * •■• 
Neither is it necessary to prove things which 
must have happened according to the ordi- 
nary course of nature; •■■ * * 
nor, any matters of public history, affecting 
the whole people ; nor, public matters, affect- 
ing the government of the country." 

When I say to you, then, that there are to- 
day in Indianajiolis ami the vicinity, and 
have been for the last six months, and the 
greater portion of the time, ever since 1861, 
soldiers on duty, preparing for or returning 
from the field, or passing through your city, 
in transitu from other points, in number more 
than one-half of the entire army of the United 
States previous to tliis war, it will scarcely 
be denied tliat this is the theater of military 
operations. There are here, to say nothing of 
other portions of the State, nearly 4,000 
troops. This Court will recognize the further 
fact, that upon the streets of this city, to-day, 
more than one-half of the persons you meet, are 
eitlier soldiers of the Government, or persons 
in the military employ and pay of the Gov- 



ernment ; and more than one-half of the busi- 
ness done in your city is directly, or indirect- 
ly, for our army. You are holding in your 
camps here, within sight of this city, nearly 
5,000 prisoners of war, to capture whom proba- 
bly not less than 5,000 lives of loyal men have 
been expended ; — a force of the enemy as large 
nearly as either the army of General Scott or 
General Taylor, when they invaded Mexico- 

But, last year, the enemy made a triumphal 
march through a large portion of this State, 
and all the available military forces of the 
State were called out to defend your homes. 
At what hour this same exigency may happen 
you again, with the enemy's cannon thunder- 
ing less than a hundred miles from your bor- 
der, no man can tell. No year has passed 
since the inauguration of this rebellion, and 
scarcely any month, that the commanding 
officer of this District has not had to send 
military forces into some portion of this 
State, to suppress armed insurrection. This 
is a notorious, public fact. And no month 
passes, now, but a guerrilla raid is announced 
from some of the river counties. The theater 
of military operations is the place where the 
armies are moving, or operating, where mili- 
tary forces are performing their legitimate 
duties ; tried by this rule, it can scarcely be 
denied, and certainly not successfully, that 
your State is the theater of military opera- 
tions. The condition of things here is paral- 
leled by almost every other State in the 
Union. It could scarcely be otherwise when 
the whole country is engaged and taking part 
in this war; when from an entire population 
of a little more than twentj' millions of people 
you draw from it, by volunteering and draft, 
over two millions of able-bodied men. As a 
general rule in voting, you get but one vote 
for every six inhabitants, and certainly the 
proportion of men for the army would not be 
greater than of votes. This army comes from 
every township, school district, neighborhood, 
and almost every family in the land. The 
whole land, more or less, is making this 
struggle its chief object. Congress has the 
right to call into the field, for the sake of 
maintaining the life of the Government, the 
entire physical force of this nation. When 
once in the field, that force is wielded, con- 
trolled and molded by but one will, and that, 
the will of the Commander-in-Chief. How 
soon it may be necessary to call upon this 
entire physical force, no one can tell. You 
certainly have already in the service more 
than half of those physically able to bear 
arms; and just in proportion as you obstruct 
and interfere with the efficiency of that army, 
as you promote and protect conspirators and 
conspiracies, here in these States, that must 
furnish tlie men for the armies, and the mate- 
rials of war, just in that ratio will the remain- 
ing portion of the able-bodied men be called 
upon and put into the field, to carry this war 
successfully through. 

As to the extent of this rebellion, its places 
of operation, etc., Aaron F. Perry, in his ad- 
mirable argument on the application for a 
writ of habeas corpus, before Judge Leavitt, iu 
the Vallaudigham case, says: 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



253 



"As a matter of course it can not be, and as 
a matter of fact it is not, limited to pLaces, or 
described by geographical descriptions. In 
some parts of the country it dominates society; 
in other parts it is dominated by the regular 
civil administration. We hear of no place so 
dark but that some weak prayers are uttered 
for the Constitution; and of no place so bright 
but that lurking treason sometimes leaves its 
trail, or shows, through all disguises, its sin- 
ister unrest. 

"The power and wants of the insurrection 
are not all, nor chiefly, military. It needs not 
only food, clothing, arms, medicine, but it 
needs hope and sj'mpathy. It needs moral 
aid to sustain it against reactionary tenden- 
cies. It needs argument to represent its origin 
and claims to respect favorably before the 
world. It needs information concerning the 
strength, disposition, and movements of Gov- 
ernment forces. It needs help to paralyze and 
divide opinions among those who sustain the 
Government, and needs help to hinder and 
embarrass its councils. It needs that troops 
should be withheld from Government, and its 
financial credit shaken. It needs that Gov- 
ernment should lack confidence in itself, and 
become discouraged. It needs that an opinion 
should prevail in the world that the Govern- 
ment is incapable of success, and unworthy 
of sympathy. Who can help it in either par- 
ticular I have named, can help it as eff'ectually 
as by bearing arms for it. Wherever in the 
United States a wish is entertained to give 
such help, and such wish is carried to its ap- 
propriate act, there is the place of the insur- 
rection. Since all these helps combine to 
make up the strength of the insurrection, war 
is necessarily made upon them all, when made 
upon the insurrection. Since each one of the 
insurrectionary forces holds in check, or 
neutralizes a corresponding Government force, 
and since Government is in such extremity as 
not safely to allow any part of its forces to 
withdraw from the struggle, it has no recourse 
but to strike at whatever part of this insur- 
rection it shall find exposed." 

In this State the insurrection is dominated 
by the regular civil authorities; yet it has its 
existence among you; it has its advocates, its 
adherents and abettors; those who give it aid 
and comfort; those who would give it sympathy 
and encouragement; those who carry that sym- 
pathy and encouragement into action. For 
the keeping of this part of the insurrection, 
this part of the rebellion in subjection, the 
Government has deemed it necessary to place 
troops here, and elsewhere in the State. To 
that extent, then, certainly, this is the theater 
of military operations; and, as I have said, 
this condition of things is paralleled in each 
of the Northern States. It is a sad fact that 
we have no State so loyal but that it is found 
nursing in its bosom some traitors, some who 
adhere to the enemies of the Government, and 
give them active sympathy and encourage- 
ment. 

On the question as to whether the proclama- 
tion of the President, cited in this case, was 
still in full force, the gentleman who has 
argued this question of jurisdiction has ex- 



pended much time and labor. I believe this 
proclamation to be in full force and effect, and 
to have been in no wise interfered with by act 
of Congress, or by any subsequent act of the 
President himself. In this proclamation of 
September, 1862, he suspends the habeas corpus, 
and puts in operation, or rather declares that 
martial law is in existence as to a certain class 
of ofl'enders; saying, in substance, that the 
necessities of the times demand that this class 
of cases shall be tried by military courts. 
He expressly limits the operation of martial 
law to the offenders, or offenses, therein desig- 
nated. 

It will be remembered by the Court, that at 
that time there was much cavil and discussion 
throughout the land, as to whether the power 
to suspend the writ of habeas corpus^ under 
the Constitution, was in the Executive or the 
Legislative branch of the Government. Con- 
gress attempted to put at rest all question upon 
that subject; and, to strengthen the arms of 
the President, passed an act, approved March 
3d, 1863, authorizing the President to sus- 
pend the writ of habeas corpus. It has always 
seemed to me that this act of Congress, to say 
the best of it, was but a nullity; the Consti- 
tution gave this power either to the Executive 
or to the Legislative department of the Govern- 
ment. If, under the Constitution, it belonged 
to the Executive, then, certainly, it was simply 
a work of supererogation for Congress to re- 
give it to the President: if it was given to 
the Legislative, it was a power which they 
could not transfer. If, under the Constitution, 
it was given to the President, as I before re- 
marked. Congress could not take it from him. 
The question, then, is simply whether this 
power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus 
belongs to the President, or to Congress. 

The suspension of the writ of habeas corpus 
is not the declaration of martial law; it is 
more properly one of the incidents of martial 
law, or of a state of war. This writ is to be 
suspended when a great public necessity shall 
demand it. And who shall be the judge as to 
when that necessity exists? 

The Constitution says "the writ of habeas 
corpus shall not be suspended unless in case 
of rebellion, or invasion, the public safety 
may require it;" thus placing its suspension 
upon the contingency of some great public 
danger or emergency. 

Our legislative body, Congress, usually con- 
venes but once a year, never oftener than 
twice a year: and in times of foreign war, 
invasion, or rebellion, would we dare to say 
that the Government should wait the expira- 
tion of that year, or until Congress could be 
convened, to suspend the writ of habeas corpus 
or declare martial law? Such a course would 
be suicidal, and destructive of the Government 
itself. The power certainly does rest where 
it properly should rest, with the Executive of 
the Government; the Commander-in-Chief of 
the armies; the power that wields the physical 
force that must defend the life of the nation, 
if that life be in danger. It, then, being with 
the Executive, Congress, by its action, in no 
wise changed or interfered with this original 
prerogative of the President. It simply put 



254 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



at rest the discussion as to where this power 
was vested. 

After the passage of this act of Congress, 
the President again issued a proclamation of 
September 15th, 18G3, entirely suspending the 
writ of habeas corpus throughout the United 
States as to all classes of persons held by 
authority of the United States, or charged 
with offenses against the Government. This 
was simply making larger and more compre- 
hensive his proclamation of September, 1862. 
It in no wise abrogated that proclamation, or 
interfered with its action; it was confined 
purely to the writ of habeas corpus, and was 
made universal in its operation. Military 
courts were before given jurisdiction, and 
martial law was declared as to certain classes 
of ofi"enses; this, certainly, did not take from 
those courts that jurisdiction, neither ex- 
pressly, nor by implication; it did not inter- 
fere with the operations of martial law, which 
had already been declared. 

As to the proclamation of the President in 
Kentucky, on the 5th day of July, 1864, that 
was simply a proclamation which put into 
force martial law, and declared that such a 
state of war existed in that State as to demand 
the entire silence of civil law ; that martial 
law, without being confined to any particular 
class of persons or oflFenses, should there be in 
existence in all its power and force. It in no 
wise abrogated, or interfered with, the procla- 
mation of 1862, but simply said that in that 
State there was a necessitj' for a more extended 
operation of martial law than was required 
in other States, and was perfectly consistent 
with the proclamation of 1862, and also with 
that of 1863, suspending the writ of habeas 
corpus. This, I think, sufiiciently answers the 
inquiry of the gentleman as to why the proc- 
lamation of July 5th, 1864, was issued. 

Finally, as to the formal proclamation of 
the President, clothing this Court with juris- 
diction, I call the attention of the Court 
to Lawrence's Wheaion on International Law, 
page 522, note, where the author, after review- 
ing in an extended article the statutory 
provisions and regulations of the diflferent 
European Governments in reference to the 
suspension of the writ of habeas corpus and 
the proclamation of martial law, as to this 
particular proclamation of September 24th, 
18C2, says: "But, whatever may be the infer- 
ence to be deduced, either from constitutional 
or international law, or from the usages of 
European Governments, as to the legitimate 
depository of the power of suspending the writ 
of habeas corpus, the virtual abrogation of the 
judiciary in cases affecting individual liberty, 
and the establishment, as matter of /act, in the 
United States, by the Executive alone, of 
martial law — not merely in the insurrectionary 
districts or in cases of military occupancy, 
but throughout the entire Union, and not tem- 
porarily, but as an institution as permanent 
as the insurrection on which it professes to be 
based, and capable, on the same principle, of 
being revived in all cases of foreign as well 
as civil war — are placed beyond question by 
the President's proclamation of September 24, 
1862. It was issued two days after the proc- 



lamation for the emancipation of the slaves in 
the insurgent States," etc. 

The counsel for the accused has especially 
requested me to answer the inquiry, how any 
department of this Government — each depart- 
ment being limited in its authority by its 
organic law, the Constitution — can exercise 
the despotic power of martial law? 

I answer him that that department of the 
Government has that power, which has been 
expressly clothed, by that organic law, with 
despotic and perfect arbitrary' power, in cer- 
tain contingencies. I refer to the President 
when acting as the military chieftain of the 
armies. As I have before stated, the greatest 
efficiency of any army is achieved when it 
approaches nearest the perfection of arbitrary 
and absolute rule; and that, from time im- 
memorial, has been the aim of all military 
laws and regulations. Every nation having 
an army, has felt that there should be but one 
will to govern that army, to wield the physical 
force under its command, and that will abso- 
lute and untrammeled. In times of war, the 
power of the President of the United States, 
as Commander-in-Chief of her armies, is des- 
potic and arbitrary; and must be so, to be of 
any efficiency whatever — assuming, of course, 
that the objects to be achieved are legitimate 
and constitutional. War is defined by Vattel 
as "that state in which a nation prosecutes 
its rights by force." 

We next come to the consideration of the 
question of when martial law should obtain, 
and what the necessity is that will warrant 
it; whether that necessity has existed in this 
country during this rebellion; whether that 
necessity now exists, so as to warrant this 
Court to proceed in these cases; and whether 
the operation of martial law is consistent 
with, and known to the Constitution and laws 
of our country. 

The consideration of these points, and their 
satisfactory settlement, will also settle the 
second point upon which we place the juris- 
diction of this Court, to wit: that were no 
such formal power conveyed by the proclama- 
tion of the President, yet the "laws of war," 
the military lex non scripta, and the necessity 
of the present crisis, would clothe this Court 
with jurisdiction to try this class of offenses. 
In considering these questions, I do not pro- 
pose so much to go back to the decisions of the 
dark ages, nor to untomb the obsolete law of 
a thousand years ago, nor to rely so much 
upon English precedents where the forms cf 
that Government are so entirely different 
from those of our own, as upon the action, 
the precedents, and opinions of the great and 
good men of our own nation. The very or- 
ganizations of those despotic, kingly Govern- 
ments would preclude and almost make im- 
possible the idea that their action could be 
quoted as precedents for us. There the King 
and his faction were at war ever with the 
aristocracy and the people ; the aristocracy 
and their interests were at war with the 
King and the people ; and the interests of the 
people, the masses, were always, and ever, 
adverse to the other two. At one time the 
King would be so securely enthroned, and so 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



255 



strongly seated upon the arms of his soldiers, 
that he carried his kingly prei'ogatives to a 
cruel and oppressive extent; and again, the 
aristocracy, the titled few of the nation, the 
landed nobles would dominate, and their inter- 
ests would lake precedence; and then again 
the masses, through some noble patriot and 
champion, would make a struggle once more for 
their rights. The history of ages and nations 
that are gone by, are not, therefore, consistent 
precedents for us; they are not consistent 
with each other. Here, the great, controlling 
powers and interests are the rights of the 
people ; no class, no king, nor potentate can 
maintain interests adverse to them. It can 
not, however, be said that the action of the 
English Government, or that the English prece- 
dents cited by the gentleman in his argument, 
are against the enforcement of martial law, 
as they do recognize its existence and utility 
in great emergencies. Most of the cases 
cited in that argument — replete, as it is, 
with vast research and learning — are instan- 
ces of the abuse of martial law ; of the King 
using it for carrying out his peculiar and 
tyrannical notions, for oppressing some par- 
ticular subject. And I could take the same 
cases cited by the gentleman himself, to show 
that in no century has any great emergency 
arisen, as civil war or rebellion, in that 
country, but that some department of the 
Government took upon itself the responsi- 
bility of declaring martial law, and permit- 
ted the officers of its army to act under its 
aegis; — in some instances Parliament declar- 
ing martial law, in others the King claiming 
it as his peculiar prerogative. Most of the 
cases cited in which there was an outcry 
against martial law, were those in which the 
King, in time of peace, had undertaken to en- 
force martial law in some oppressive manner 
against some particular subject, from a per- 
sonal motive. The most prominent to which 
the gentleman r<efers is that given by Sir 
Matthew Hale, in his history of the Common 
Law, which reads: "The exercise of martial 
law, whereby any person should lose his life, 
member, or liberty, may not be permited, in 
time of peace," etc. 

And again, in the case of Edmund, Earl of 
Kent, which was afterward reversed in Ist 
Edward 3, the language used is as follows : 
"That whenever any subject of the Lord the 
King shall be arrested for sedition in time of 
peace," etc. In the same case, also, the fol- 
lowing language occurs : * * * * * 
"Whence it follows that when it is made 
known and manifest that all the time during 
which it is alleged that the crimes were done, 
on account of which he was arrested, to the 
time in which he was taken and adjudged to 
death, was a time of profound peace," etc. 

I shall not stop now to refer to the circum- 
stances of the suspension of the writ of 
habeas corpus, in these cases in England, but 
simply cite the gentleman's attention to the 
fact that it was suspended at the time of the 
invasion of the Pretender, in 1715, and his 
son in 1745, in .reland in 1800, and from 1802 
to 1805, from 1807 to 1810, in 1812, and from 
1822 to 1824. I desire, however, to call the 



attention of the gentleman and that of the 
Court to the action of the British Government 
in 1848; — the action and speeches of the 
statesmen of that Government, some of whom 
are still on the political stage. 

The agitation in Ireland began to assume 
a threatening aspect directly after the conti- 
nental revolutions of February and March; 
but in the pi'«vious December, Parliament had 
passed an a-ct forbidding the possession of 
arms in certain ti'oublesome districts. In 
April an act called the Felony Bill, was 
passed, making it felony "for any person to 
compass, imagine, or intend to depose the 
sovereign, or to levy war against her." In 
July, the Whig ministry, through Lord John 
Russell, introduced a bill into Parliament, 
empowering the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, 
and Deputies, to apprehend and detain till 
the 1st of March, 1849, such persons as they 
should suspect of conspiring against Her 
Majesty's person and government. This was 
a suspension of the act of habeas corpus for all 
Ireland ; — the loyal northern part of the 
island, as well as the disaffected east, and the 
rebellious south and west. The bill was in- 
troduced, and went through all its stages to 
its final passage, in one day; on the next day, 
in like manner it passed the House of Lords, 
the vote being unanimous in both houses, and 
on the same day, received the assent of the 
Queen. Even the Irish members did not vote 
against it. Lord Brougham, in speaking upon 
the bill in the House of Lords, said : 

"A friend of liberty I have lived, and so I 
shall die — nor do I care how soon that may 
be, if I can not be the friend of liberty with- 
out being a friend of traitors at the same 
time, without being a protector of criminals, 
without being deemed to be the accomplice of 
foul rebellion and its concomitant civil war, 
with all its hideous train of atrocious crimes. 
It is because I am a friend of liberty that I 
detest the conspiracies which are brewing in 
the sister isle. The noble Marquis (Lans- 
downe) has informed us that the danger is 
imminent. Then let the measure which in- 
vests the Government with needful, and no 
more than needful powers, be immediately 
adopted." 

These words come home to us to-day with 
peculiar force. Earl Derby, then Lord Stan- 
ley, said : 

"I think that the Government has asked 
for the right remedy. I think the remedy for 
which they have asked is one which will 
strike the right persons, and strike them with- 
in the right time. I am not one of those who 
would seek for victims among the credulous 
dupes of the incendiary agitators of Ireland — 
dupes who will be put forward in the front 
ranks for the purpose of committing crimes 
and outrages. I do not desire — God forbid 
that I should — that upon them the severest 
penalty of the law should fall. No ! I desire 
it should fall upon those who, well knowing 
the consequences of their conduct — who, well 
knowing the falseness of their pretexts — who, 
well knowing the fatal effects that must flow 
from the doctrines they preach, evince a read- 
iness to sacrifice every thing to their passions 



256 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



and their sordid interests, and for their own 
purposes, do not hesitate to inTolve their 
friendless and too credulous fellow country- 
men in the guilt of treason and the danger of 
civil war. The persons I wish to see punished 
are those who have sufficient skill, who have 
sufficient information and intelligence to keep 
themselves free from such legal guilt as would 
bring them under the operation of the law, 
with the probability of a conviction, but who, 
nevertheless, are morallj- guilty in the eye of 
God and man, of the crime of inciting to 
treason, murder, rebellion and civil war. I 
favor the measure now proposed, chiefly be- 
cause by its means we shall get rid of all 
doubts and difficulties ; we shall have no more 
of these delays of the war, no more of the 
chicanci-y wliich encourages evil doers to hope 
for ultimate escape, and which is certain to 
cause such procrastination that when, at 
length, the sword of justice falls, the example 
does not produce half the effect it ought to 
have." 

In the House of Commons, Lord John Rus- 
sell said : 

" I believe in my conscience that this 
measure is calculated to prevent insurrection, 
to preserve internal peace, to preserve the 
unity of this empire, to save the throne of 
these realms and the free institutions of this 
country." 

Sir Robert Peel, in speaking on this bill, 
said : 

" I, for one, am perfectly prepared to insist 
on no ordinary powers. I believe that the 
Government is justified in asking for this 
measure. I believe the measure itself — the 
power to apprehend on suspicion, and keep 
the conspirators in confinements — is necessary. 
I will not urge on the ministry measures of 
greater coercion than those their own respon- 
sibility demands; but this I say, as nothing 
but necessity can justify a suspension of the 
habeas corpus act, the same necessity makes 
immediate action desirable." 

Mr. Disraeli thought the House "ought not 
to hesitate to grant the Government the great 
and extraordinary powers for which they 
ask." 

And Mr. Joseph Hume, the leader of the 
Liberals, and always the fast friend of Ire- 
land, said that he should "be sorry to see 
any division on the measure now before the 
House." 

Martial law in England as completely vio- 
lates and suspends the Magna Charta as in 
this country it does our Constitution. Sec- 
tion 39, which has been referred to by the 
gentleman, provides that "no freeman shall 
be taken, or imprisoned, or disseized, or out- 
lawed, or banished, or any way injured, nor 
will we pass upon him, nor send upon him, 
unless by the lawful judgment of his peers, 
or by the law of the land." 

The Mutiny Act, of 1689— and which has 
been re-enacted at every session of Parlia- 
ment for more than 175 years — contains, 
among others, the following declaration : 

" Whereas, no man may be forejudged of 
life or limb, or subject to any kind of judg- 
ment by martial law, or any other matter 



than by the judgment of his peers, and ac- 
cording to the known and established laws 
of this realm,' etc. There is no doctrine more 
ineradicably graven upon the Constitution 
and the civil polity of England, than the 
writ of habeas corpus and the exemption of the 
subject from martial law; but, notwithstand- 
ing this clear provision of the Magna Charta, 
as often as it has been necessary, martial law 
has been proclaimed. 

In the riots of 1780, after the mob had in- 
sulted a member of Parliament, and threatened 
to attack the residence of the Chief Justice, the 
King in Council issued his proclamation, as 
follows: 

"We have therefore issued the most direct 
and effectual orders to all our officers, by an 
immediate exertion of their utmost force, to 
suppress the same." After which the Adju- 
tant General issued the following order, to 
wit: 

"In obedience to the order of the King in 
Council, the military are to act without wait- 
ing the direction of the civil magistrate, and 
to use force for dispersing the illegal and 
tumultuous assemblages of the people." 

In subsequent debates in Parliament, the 
conduct of the King was approved. Lord 
Mansfield and Lord Thurlow claimed that it 
was not a prerogative of the King to declare 
martial law, or to use the military to suppress 
riots, but they defended the act on the ground 
of necessity. 

During the Irish rebellion, in 1798, the Lord 
Lieutenant of Ireland, Lord Camden, pro- 
claimed martial law, which existed a year 
without any legislative action; and after that, 
the Irish Parliament sanctioned the act. In 
1801, after the Union, this subject was dis- 
cussed, and a bill was introduced to continue 
martial law. In this debate, both those who 
approved and those who opposed the bill con- 
ceded the right of the Executive Government 
to proclaim martial law when necessary. 
Sheridan, who opposed the bill, said: 

"In case of rebellion, or invasion. His Maj- 
esty has, by virtue of his prerogative, a right 
to martial law." 

Lord Castlereagh, in defense of the bill, said : 

"I perfectly understand that the prerogative 
of the Crown authorizes this act, in its author- 
ity to exercise martial law. I maintain that 
it is a constitutional mode for the Executive 
Government to exercise martial law in the 
first instance, and to come to Parliament for 
indemnity afterward, and is pref'eral)le to 
applying to Parliament first." This is a some- 
what anomalous declaration on the part of 
Lord Castlereagh; for if it was a prerogative 
of the Crown, and a constitutional mode of 
exercising that prerogative, where is the ne- 
cessity of any subsequent indemnifying act? 
He goes on to say: "Tiie only circumstance in 
mind is, whether, if tlie necessity exists, this 
is the proper remedy? If it be so, we ought 
not to take alarm at a departure from prin- 
ciple, which is necessary for the preservation 
of the Constitution itself." 

Sir L. Paisons, in opposing the bill, said he 
thought "the measure unnecessary. The Ex- 
ecutive Government could resort to martial 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



257 



law if it was necessary to suppress rebel- 
lion." 

Mr. Gray, also one of its opponents, said: 

"It was better that the Government should 
resort to what had been called (he thought 
not legally) its prerogative of proclaiming 
martial law. That was no prerogative of the 
Crown, but rather an act of that power sanc- 
tioned by necessity, martial law being a sus- 
pension of the King's peace. But it was better 
that martial law should proceed from the 
Executive Government, in urgent moments, 
than be the work of the Legislature, on very 
slight pretexts." 

At the time of the rebellion in Ceylon, in 
1848, the Governor proclaimed martial law, 
and tried and executed many rebels. Here is 
a case exactly in point. His conduct was se- 
verely criticised in England, upon the ground 
that it was unnecessary; and in an able review 
in the Quarterly, volume 83, page 127, we find 
the following: 

"We shall define martial law to be the law 
of necessity, or defense. The right which a 
Governor of a colony has to proclaim martial 
law over subjects, may be said to bear a close 
analogy to the right which an individual, in 
absence of legal protection, has to slay an 
assailant. In both cases, the evil must be 
grave. In both cases, all regular means of 
defense must be exhausted, or beyond reach, 
before the aggi'ieved party resorts to extrem- 
ities. In both cases, the burden of proof lies 
on him who has ventured on such an expedient ; 
and if he fails to vindicate himself, he is liable 
to severe punishment. 

"Hallam 1, Constitutional History, page 240, 
says: 

" 'There may, indeed, be times of pressing 
danger, when the conservation of all demands 
a sacrifice of the legal rights of a few; there 
may be circumstances that not only justify, 
but compel the abandonment of constitutional 
forms. It has been usual for all Governments, 
during an actual rebellion, to proclaim martial 
law, or the suspension of civil jurisdiction. 
And this anomaly, I must admit, is very far 
from being less indispensable at such unhappy 
seasons, in countries where the ordinary mode 
of trial is by jury, than where the right of 
decision rests in the judge.' " 

In considering the opinions and action of 
British statesmen upon this question, it should 
be borne in mind that there is an essential 
diff"erence between the King of England and 
the President of the United States, in respect 
to the prerogatives with which they are clothed 
by the constitutional laws of the respective 
nations. The King of England is not the 
Commander-in-Chief of her army and navy, 
whereas the President of the United States is, 
by express provision of our Constitution. 

Upon the question of what martial law is, 
and wherein it diflTers from military law, there 
can be no diflFerence of opinion, and need be 
but little discussion. The rules and regula- 
tions, and special acts of Congress existing 
for the government of those persons in the 
military service of the country, constitute the 
military law; and they are as clear and well 
defined as any statutes of the land. Martial 
17 



law, on the contrary, can never be restricted 
by any defined lines, because it is the law of 
necessity, the law of self-defense, of self- 
preservation; it is a law to meet a state of 
disorder; a law to meet the exigences and 
necessities of great, unexpected emergencies; 
and whatever law, or rule of action, becomes 
necessary to meet those emergencies, is martial 
law. As, for illustration, martial law, as now 
being administered, has given these prisoners 
a fair, impartial hearing, according to the 
strict rules of the civil law, in all questions 
of evidence, argument, etc.; it has given them 
the benefit of counsel, of processes to compel 
the attendance of witnesses; it has allowed 
them a clear and public trial, in open day, 
before their peers, and before just and honor- 
able men. But, under other circumstances, 
and greater emergencies, it might have de- 
manded that they be shot down in the streets, 
without trial, and without hearing; as in case 
they had gone forward in this conspiracy, 
attacked your camps, undertaken to release 
your prisoners, and burn your city. In one 
case, the emergency might have demanded 
instant and summary punishment, because 
found in the act of insurrection; the other 
admits of, and permits, an investigation ac- 
cording to the forms of law, to see whether 
the accused were actually engaged in, and 
moving forward to the consummation of an 
insurrection. 

Martial law should obtain, does obtain, and 
must obtain whenever a state of war exists. 
Says Vattel, in his Laiv of Nations, page 346: 
"The whole is deduced from one single prin- 
ciple; from the object of a just war; for, 
when the end is lawful, he who has a right to 
pursue that end, has, of course, a right to 
employ all the means which are necessary for 
its attainment." 

When the fact of war was once established 
throughout this country, instantly, by reason 
of that fact, were brought into existence, so 
far as was necessary, the laws of war; and 
those laws were in operation wherever the 
war was being prosecuted. Wherever the 
army existed, was moving, in part or in whole, 
or doing battle, there the laws of war took 
precedence of the civil laws, the laws of peace. 
In some places, where the clash of arms had 
made silent all civil avocations, the army was 
the controlling, the dominant power: the laws 
of war, martial law, the law of necessity, was 
the sole law. In other places, where only a 
branch of the army was operating, existing, 
or moving in the general purposes of war, 
some portions of the civil law would continue 
in operation: those only, however, which were 
not inconsistent with the existence, move- 
ments, or operations of that part of the army. 
Of the necessity that will warrant the declar- 
ation of martial law, or the silencing of the 
civil law, in part or in whole, the Commander- 
in-Chief, or his subordinate military com- 
mander, can, and must be, the sole judge; 
and while it is being exercised, it is the dom- 
inant law, and is just as much law, just as 
much constitutional law, as any portion of 
the civil law. As I have before remarked, 
the of&cer or person exercising this high power 



258 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



must be, and always is, held to a high ac- 
countability. If the President exercise it, he 
can be held accountable to the House and Sen- 
ate on impeachment; if an inferior military 
commander, he can beheld accountable before 
either a military or a civil tribunal. 

It will be recollected by this Court, that in 
^fay, 1861, while the courts were open and in 
full force, one John Merryman, a citizen of 
Marj'land, was arrested by military authority, 
and held by express sanction and direction of 
the President. A great outcry was raised 
throughout the country, by such men as Val- 
landigham, Voorhees, and others, at this arbi- 
trary arrest, as they called it, and Mr. Val- 
landigham, in an extra session, in 1861, brought 
forward in the House a resolution of censure 
or impeachment of the President, for his 
unauthorized acts during the war, his procla- 
mations with reference to the blockade, calling 
out armies to suppress the rebellion, his arbi- 
trary arrests, etc. At this same session, 
August 6th, 1861, Congress took action upon 
this subject as follows: 

'■'■And be it further enacted, That all the acts, 
proclamations, and orders of the President of 
the United States after the fourth of March, 
eighteen hundred and sixty-one, respecting 
the army and navy of the United States, and 
calling out or relating to the militia or volun- 
teers from the States, are hereby approved 
and in all respects legalized and made valid, 
to the same extent, and with the same effect 
as if they had been issued and done under the 
previous express authority and direction of 
the Congress of the United States." Vol. 12 
United States Statutes at Large, page 326. 
Thus says the law by which Congress conveyed 
to the President their approval of the power 
then exercised by him, and their opinion of 
its necessity. When the necessity for its exer- 
cise does exist, and the authorities act prompt- 
ly and vigorously for the good of the Govern- 
ment and the people, and for the preservation 
of the life of the nation, that action will be 
justified and commended by all good men ; 
for it can hardly be said that the Constitution 
did not contemplate and provide for the perpe- 
tuity of its own existence, and give to those 
who were charged with its preservation suffi- 
cient power to defend its life in great emer- 
gencies ; or that it withheld from the Execu- 
tive, the vital arm of the Government, the 
pow.«r and the right to strike in its own de- 
fense, and for its very existence. 

Some persons, generally those who have not 
the best interests of the nation at heart, have 
been inclined to look upon our Constitution 
as a cast iron frame, incapable of change or 
growth; in other words, unfitted to the inev- 
itable growth of the nation ; as not framed to 
be prospective in its operations, nor con- 
structed to meet the wants of an everchang- 
ing, increasing, and progressive nation. Or 
regard it as an iron band placed about the 
trunk of a living tree, which would girdle it 
in its growth, or be burst by it. We are in- 
clined to that liberal and seemingly states- 
manlike construction of the instrument that 
believes it to be adopted to meet the exigen- 
ces of the nation for which it was brought 



into existence ; we say with Solicitor Whit- 
ing : 

" By a liberal construction of the Constitu- 
tion, our Government has passed through 
many storms unharmed. Slaveholding States, 
other than those whose inhabitants originally 
formed it, have found their way into the Union, 
notwithstanding the guarantee of equal rights 
to all. The territories of Florida and Louisiana 
have been purchased from European powers. 
Conquest has added a nation to our borders. 
The purchased and the conquered regions are 
now legally a part of the United States. The 
admission of new States containing a privil- 
eged class, the incorporation into our Union 
of a foreign people, are held to be lawful 
and valid by all the Courts of the country. 
Thus far from the old anchorage have we 
sailed under the flag of 'public necessity,' 
'general welfare,' or 'common defense.' Yet 
the great charter of our political rights 'still 
lives;' and the question of to-day is, whether 
that instrument, which has not prevented 
America from acquiring one country by pur- 
chase, and another by conquest, will permit 
her to save herself f 

It seems to me that our statesmen, hereto- 
fore, have been too free to admit the limited 
and circumscribed powers of that great or- 
ganic law ; but in support of this exercise of 
the law of necessity — of martial law — some 
of the prominent writers of our country and 
many of its ablest statesmen have claimed 
that a military commander would be author- 
ized to disregard the Constitution and laws 
themselves, were it necessary to the preserva- 
tion of the republic ; and there is no doubt 
but that the government de facto would be en- 
tirely upheld and sanctioned in the exercise 
of such a power. 

It will be remembered that while General 
Jackson was in command of New Orleans, in 
1814, when the British were besieging that 
city, he declared martial law; believing that 
the safety of the city, and the safety and wel- 
fare of the citizens demanded it, and that it 
was necessary for his successful defense of 
the same. While in command of the city, the 
General arrested a Frenchman named Loual- 
ler, on a charge of instigating treason and 
mutiny, and for conspiring with other trea- 
sonable persons in the city, to aid the enemy. 
Without affidavit, presentment, or indictment, 
he arrested this man, threw him into prison, 
and held him. Judge Hall, the United States 
District Judge for that District, on the 5th 
day of March, 1815, issued a writ of habeas 
corpus directed to General Jackson, requiring 
him to answer in person, and bring the per- 
son of Louallier before him. General Jack- 
son, instead of obeying the writ, arrested this 
Judge of the United States Court, and by mil- 
itary force, without hearing or trial, held him 
for a time as prisoner, and finally sent him 
beyond his lines. Here was the declaration of 
martial law, its rigid enforcement, arbitrary 
arrest, and punishment without any form of 
trial, by that old patriot General Jackson, 
whose heroic deeds and name are enshrined in 
the hearts of all who love their country. 
After the city was saved, and that glorious 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



259 



battle of New Orleans — which will ever make 
the name of Jackson immortal — was closed, 
and the enemy had withdrawn from the envi- 
rons of the city, the necessity for martia^ 
law no longer existed, and General Jackson, 
by public proclamation, abrogated it. Judge 
Ilall then returned to the city ; had General 
Jackson brought before him on a charge of 
contempt of Court, for refusing to obey the 
writ of habeas corpus, and fined him $1,000. 
The necessity, as before stated, for martial 
law having passed away, and the majesty of 
the civil law having again asserted itself, the 
General bowed in submission to its mandates. 
His army, and the loyal citizens of New Or- 
leans, were so indignant and so outraged by 
this conduct of Judge Hall, that it was only 
through the efforts of General Jackson him- 
self, that the Judge was saved from personal 
violence. 

In the winter of 1843-4, on a resolution to 
refund to General Jackson this excessive fine, 
the whole question of martial law was fully 
discussed by Congress. On January 7th, 
Stephen A. Douglas, that clear-headed lawyer, 
patriot and statesman, reviewed the whole 
subject in an able speech, from which I pro- 
pose to make a few extracts. He says : 

" To refuse to pass it, [the bill for refund- 
ing the fine,] would be an act of the grossest 
injustice to the American people, and would 
stamp them with ingratitude to their bravest 
defender. I am not one to admit that General 
Jackson violated the Constitution, or the law, 
at New Orleans. I deny that he violated 
either. I insist that the General rightfully 
performed every act that his duty required, 
and that his right to declare martial law, and 
enforce it, resulted from the same source, and 
rested on the same principle, that the gentle- 
man from New York [Mr. Barnard] asserted, 
from which Judge Hall derived the authority 
to punish for contempt, without trial, without 
witnesses, without jury, and without any 
thing but his own arbitrary will. The gen- 
tleman asserted that the power to punish for 
contempt was not conferred by the statute, or 
by the common law, but was inherent in 
every judicial tribunal and legislative body ; 
and he cited the authority of the Supreme 
Court to support the assertion. He said that 
this power was necessary to the Courts, to ena- 
ble them to perform the duties which the laws 
intrusted to them, and arose from the neces- 
sity of the case. Now, it was from the same 
source that the power to declare martial law 
■was derived — its necessity in time of war for 
the defense of the country. The defense of the 
lives and liberties of the people, as well as their 
property, being all intrusted to the discretion 
of the commanding General, it became his duty 
to declare martial law, if the necessity of the 
case required it. If itbecame necessary to blow 
up a fort, he was authorized to do it; If itbecame 
necessary to sink a vessel, he was authorized 
to do it; and if it became necessary to burn 
a city, he was authorized to do it. The neces- 
sity of the case was the law to govern him ; 
and he, on his responsibility, must judge of 
the existence of that necessity. It was the 
first law of nature which authorized a man to 



defend his own person, and his wife and hia 
children at all hazards. It was that law 
which authorized this body to repel aggres- 
sion and insult, and protect itself in the exer- 
cise of its legislative functions; and it was 
that law which authorized courts of justice 
to defend themselves and punish for con- 
tempts. He acknowledged that this was a 
high-handed and despotic power — one that 
was only to be exercised when necessary, and 
which ceased when the necessity no longer 
existed. Such was the power under which 
General Jackson declared martial law at New 
Orleans. On this part of the subject he did 
not intend to go into the history of all the 
occurrences of that period — they had been 
detailed in a most faithful and interesting 
manner, by the gentleman from Louisiana, 
[Mr. Slidell.] It was sufficient for him to 
know that General Jackson, who was the 
commanding General, deemed it necessary to 
declare martial law in order to defend the 
city." * * * * * * * * * * * * 
" These things would not be questioned. The 
necessity and the glorious effects resulting 
from the course which that necessity prompted 
were acknowledged by the whole country, 
and he would even say by the whole civilized 
world. Then, as far as this bill was concerned, 
he [Mr. D.] cared not whether their acts were 
legal or illegal. He cared not whether Gen- 
eral Jackson violated the Constitution or not. 
He cared not whether General Jackson sus- 
pended all civil authority or not. If his acts 
were necessary to the defense of the country, 
that necessity was above all law. General 
Jackson hazarded everything; he hazarded 
both life and reputation on that step, which 
might render him immortal if it saved the 
country, or, on the contrary, make him igno- 
minious, and a by-word, and a reproach j and 
the man that dared to do that, deserved the 
protection and the plaudits of his country. 
He did not envy the feelings of that man that 
would get up and talk calmly and coolly 
under such circumstances, about rules of 
Court and technicalities of proceeding, and 
the danger of example, when the city might 
be in flames and the utmost barbarity might 
be committed. What were rules of Court but 
mere cobwebs when they found an enemy 
with his cannon at the doors of their Courts, 
and when they saw the flames encircling the 
cupola? Talk then about rules of Court, and 
the formality of proceedings ! The man that 
would do this, would fiddle while the capital 
was burning. He envied not any man the 
possession of such stoical philosophy. Talk 
about illegality! Talk about formalities! Why, 
there was but one formality to be observed; 
and that was the formality of directing the 
cannon, and destroying the enemy, regardless 
of the means whether it be by the seizure of 
cotton bags, or the seizure of persons, if the 
necessity of the case required it. The God of 
nature has conferred this right on men and 
nations ; and therefore let him not be told 
that it was unconstitutional. To defend the 
country, let him not be told that it was un- 
constitutional to use the proper means. The 
Constitution was adopted for the protection of 



260 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



the country; and under that Conptitution the 
nation had the right to exercise all the powers 
that were necessary for the protection of the 
country. If martial law was necessary to the sal- 
vation of the country, martial law was legal for 
that purpose. If it was necessary for a judge, 
for the preservation of order, to punish for 
contempt, he thought it was necessary for a 
general to exercise control over his cannon, 
to imprison traitors, and to arrest spies, and 
to intercept communications with the enemy. 
If this was necessary, all this was legal. 

"But the ground on which he placed the 
defense — and he denied that General Jackson 
did any act which was not justified by right- 
ful and legal authority — was as high and as 
sacred as self-defense. General Jackson did 
not exercise any unnecessary arbitrary au- 
thority. He did not suspend the civil law 
nor close the civil tribunals, any farther than 
was necessary for the carrying out of the mil- 
itary defense of the country. To this extent 
he did do it, and to this extent it was right that 
he should do it. In other respects, the civil law, 
and the courts were in full force. True, Gen- 
eral Jackson would not allow them to commu- 
nicate with the enemy ; but they could not 
surrender aught to the enemy ; he deprived 
them of the power to commit treason ; but he 
deprived them of no power that an honest 
man would desire to exercise. He imposed no 
restraint that any man devoted to the country 
would regret; and the men who instigated 
proceedings against General Jackson were 
the men who skulked in the hour of danger." 
See Globe Report of the 28th Congress, first 
session. 

Robert J. Walker, in the Senate, submitted 
a report upon this subject, in which he said: 

"The law which justified this act, was the 
great law of necessity; it was the law of self- 
defense. This great law of necessity — of de- 
fense of self, of home, and of country — never 
was designed to be abrogated by any statute, 
or by any Constitution." 

Mr. Payne, of Alabama, also speaking upon 
this subject, said: 

"I shall not contend that the Constitution 
or laws of the United States authorize the 
declaration of martial law by any authority 
whatever; on the contrary, it is unknown to 
the Constitution or laws." And commenting on 
the argument that if the Constitution did not 
authorize it, the General ought not to have 
declared martial law, he says: 

"Who could tolerate this idea? An Arnold 
might, but no patriotic American could. I 
may be asked upon what principle a com- 
mander can declare martial law, when it is 
80 evident that the Constitution or laws afford 
him no authority to do so? I answer, upon 
the principle of self-defense, which rises par- 
amount to all written laws; and the justifica- 
tion of the officer who assumes the responsi- 
bility of acting on tliat principle, must rest 
upon the necessity of the case." 

In a written document submitted by General 
Jackson to the Court, Mr. Livingston gave his 
opinion as follows: 

"On the nature and eflFect of the proclama- 
tion of martial law by Major General Jackeon, 



my opinion is that such proclamation is un- 
known to the Constitution and laws of the 
United States; that it is to be justified only by 
the necessities of the case; " etc. 

With Mr. Payne and Mr. Livingston I can 
not fully agree. I believe the power exercised 
by General Jackson, or by any military com- 
mander in any great emergency — in the dc- 
fenseof a city, of a people, or the nation itself — 
is expressly authorized and sanctioned by the 
Constitution, by that provision which makes 
the President Commander-in-Chief of the 
armies, and that other provision which charges 
him to take care that the laws be faithfully 
executed. "In a lesser degree, the same power 
may be constitutionally exercised by a subor- 
dinate military commander. 

And Congress sanctioned this view of the 
case, by refunding to General Jackson this 
fine, with full interest; every Democratic 
member of Congress and many of the Whigs, 
voting for it. It was passed in the House, 
January 8th, 1844, by the unparalleled ma- 
jority of 158 to 28, and in the Senate, by 30 
to 16. 

Thomas Jefi"erson, in his letter to Mr. Colvin, 
dated September 20th, 1810, (see Jefferson's 
Complete Works, volume 5), has also very fully 
discussed this question. In speaking of the 
action of General Wilkinson, at New Orleans, 
he instances cases almost exactly parallel to 
those in hand. The cases were not as strong 
as these, for no war was in actual existence, 
no actual rebellion holding at bay the entire 
Government, but only the expectancy of an 
insurrection or rebellion; and yet JeflFerson 
justifies Wilkinson in seizing notorious con- 
spirators within his limits, and sending them 
beyond his lines, without trial or hearing, to 
the seat of Government, when they had a right, 
by the terms of the Constitution, to trial in 
the district in which their ofl'enses were com- 
mitted, and says that there can be but two 
opinions upon this question, that of the guilty 
and their accomplices, and that of all honest 
men. 

"The question you propose, whether circum- 
stances do not sometimes occur which make 
it a duty in officers of high trust, to assume 
authorities beyond the law, is easy of solution 
in principle, but sometimes embarrassing in 
practice. A strict observance of the written 
laws, is doubtless one of the high duties of a 
good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws 
of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving 
our country when in danger, are of higher 
obligation. To lose our country by a scrupu- 
lous adherence to written law, would be to 
lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property, 
and all those who are enjoying them with us; 
thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means. 
When, in the battle of Germantown, General 
Washington's army was annoyed from Chew's 
house, he did not hesitate to plant his cannon 
against it, although the property of a citizen. 
When he besieged Yorktown, he leveled the 
suburbs, feeling that the laws of property 
must be postponed to the safety of the nation. 
While the army was before York, the Governor 
of Virginia took horses, carriages, provisions, 
and even men, by force, to enable that army 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



261 



to stay together till it could master the public 
enemy; and he was justified. A ship at sea, 
I in distress for provisions, meets another hav- 

ing abundance, yet refusing a supply; the 
law of self-preservation authorizes the dis- 
tressed to take a supply by force. In all these 
cases, the unwritten laws of necessity, of self- 
preservation, and of the public safety, control 
the written laws of metim and tuiim. * * * 

"To proceed to the conspiracy of Burr, and 
particularly to General AVilkinson's situation 
in New Orleans. In judging this case we are 
bound to consider the state of the information, 
correct and incorrect, which he then possessed. 
He expected Burr and his band from above, a 
British fleet from below, and he knew there 
was a formidable conspiracy within the city. 
Under these circumstances, was he justifiable, 
1st, in seizing notorious conspirators? On 
;, this there can be but two opinions; one, of 
the guilty and their accomplices; the other, 
that of all honest men. 2d. In sending them 
to the seat of Government, when the written 
law gave them a right to trial in the territory ? 
The danger of their rescue, of their continu- 
ing their machinations, the tardiness and 
weakness of the law, apathy of the judges, 
active patronage of the whole tribe of lawyers, 
unknown disposition of the juries, an hourly 
expectation of the enemy, salvation of the 
city, and of the Union itself, which would 
have been convulsed to its center, had that 
conspiracy succeeded; all these constituted a 
law of necessity and self-preservation, and 
rendered the salus populi supreme over the 
written law. The officer who is called to act 
on this superior ground, does indeed risk 
himself on the justice of the controlling powers 
of the Constitution, and his station makes it 
his duty to incur that risk. But those con- 
trolling powers, and his fellow citizens gen- 
erally, are bound to judge according to the 
circumstances under which he acted." 

I refer the gentleman to these well digested 
and unequivocal utterances of the President 
of the United States — I might say one of the 
founders of the Government — and one of the 
most learned expounders of the Constitution, 
as an answer to why these arrests? and where 
the jurisdiction of this Court? 

In a debate in Congress, on the joint resolu- 
tions of distributing rations to the distressed 
refugees from Indian hostilities, on the 26th 
of May, 1836, John Quincy Adams, in speaking 
upon the subject of the war power of Congress 
and of the President, said: 

"Now, the powers incidental to war are 
derived, not from their internal municipal 
Bource, but from the laws and usages of nations. 

"There are, then, Mr. Chairman, in the au- 
thority of Congress and of the Executive, two classes 
of powers, altogether different in their nature, and 
often incompatible with each other — the war power 
and the peace power. The peace power is limited 
by regulations and restricted by provisions 
prescribed within the Constitution itself. The 
war power is limited only by the laws and 
usages of nations. This power is tremendous ; 
it is strictly constitutional, but it breaks down every 
barrier so anxiously erected for the protection of 
liberty, of property, and of life. 



K* « « * * There are, indeed, powers 
of peace conferred upon Congress which also 
come within the scope and jurisdiction of the 
laws of nations, such as the negotiation of trea- 
ties of amity and commerce, the interchange 
of public ministers and consuls, and all the 
personal and social intercourse between the 
individual inhabitants of the United States 
and foreign nations, and the Indian tribes, 
which require the interposition of any law. 
But the powers of war are all regulated by the 
laws of nations, and are subject to no other lim- 
itation." Thus it will be seen that all the power 
claimed for the President as Commander-in- 
Chief of the armies, or for his subordinate 
military commanders, is more than conceded 
by this great statesman. In speaking upon 
this same subject. Solicitor AVhiting, in the 
pamphlet from which I have already quoted, 
forcibly says: 

"Some persons havequestioned whethertitle 
passes in this country by capture or confisca- 
tion, by reason of some of the limiting clauses 
of the Constitution ; and others have gone so far 
as to assert that all the proceedings under mar- 
tial law, such as capturing enemy's property, 
imprisonment ofspies and traitors, and seizures 
of articles contraband of war, and suspending 
the habeas corpus, are in violation of the Con- 
stitution, which declares that no man shall be 
deprived of life, liberty, or property without 
due process of law; that private property shall 
not be taken for public use without just com- 
pensation; that unreasonable searches and 
seizures shall not be made; that freedom of 
speech and of the press shall not be abridged; 
and that the right of the people to keep and 
bear arms shall not be infringed. 

"If these rules are applicable to a state of 
war, then capture of property is illegal, and 
does not pass a title; no defensive war can be 
carried on; no rebellion can be suppressed; 
no invasion can be repelled; the army of the 
United States, when called into the field, can 
do no act of hostility. Not a gun can be fired 
constitutionally, because it might deprive a rebel 
foe of his life without due process of law — 
firing a gun not being deemed a 'due process 
of law.' * » * » » * If these rules 
above cited have any application in time of 
war, the United States can not protect each of 
the States from invasion by citizens of other 
States, nor against domestic violence; nor can 
the army, or militia, or navy be used for any 
of the purposes for which the Constitution 
authorizes or requires their employment. If 
all men have the right to 'keep and bear 
arms,' what right has the army of the Union 
to take them away from rebels? If 'no one 
can constitutionally be deprived of life, lib- 
erty, or property without due process of law,' 
by what right does Government seize and 
imprison traitors? By what right does the 
army kill rebels in arms, or burn up their 
military stores? If the only way of dealing 
constitutionally with rebels in arms is to go 
to law with them, the President should con- 
vert his army into lawyers, justices of the 
peace, and constables, and serve 'summonses 
to appear and answer to complaints,' instead 
of a summons to surrender. He should send 



262 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



'greetings' instead of sending rifle shot. 
He should load his caissons with 'pleas in 
abatement and demurrers,' instead of thirty- 
two pound shell and grape shot. In short, 
he should levy writs of execution, instead of 
levying war. On the contrary, the Com- 
mander-in-Chief proposes a different applica- 
tion of the due process of law. His sum- 
mons is, that rebels should lay down their 
arms; his pleas are batteries and gunboats; 
his arguments are hot shot, and 'always to 
the point;' and when his fearful execution is 
' levied on the body,' all that is left will be 
for the undertaker. 

"The clauses which have been cited from 
the amendments to the Constitution were 
intended as declarations of peaceful and loyal 
citizens, and safeguards in the administra- 
tion of justice by the civil tribunals; but it 
was necessary, in oi'der to give the Govern- 
ment the means of defending itself against 
domestic or foreign enemies, to maintain its 
authority and dignity, and to enforce obedi- 
ence to its laws, that it should have unlim- 
ited war powers; and it must not be forgotten 
that the same authority which provides those 
safeguards, and guarantees those rights, also 
imposes upon the President and Congress the 
duty of so carrying on war as of necessity to 
supersede and hold in temporary suspense, 
such civil rights as may prove inconsistent 
with the complete and effectual exercise of 
such war powers, and of the belligerent rights 
resulting from them. •■■ * * * * By 
martial law, loyal citizens may be for a time 
debarred from enjoying the rights they would 
be entitled to in time of peace. Individual 
rights must always be held subject to the exi- 
gences of national safety. 

"In war, when martial law is in force, the 
laws of war are the laws which the Constitu- 
tion expressly authorizes and requires to be 
enforced. The Constitution, when it calls 
into action martial law, for the time changes 
civil rights, or rights which the citizen would 
be entitled to in peace, because the rights of 
persons in one of these cases are totally in- 
compatible with the obligations of persons in 
the other. Peace and war can not exist to- 
gether — the laws of peace and war can not 
operate together ; the rights and procedures 
of peaceful times are incompatible with those 
of war. It is an obvious, but pernicious error 
to suppose that in a state of war, the rules of 
martial law, and the consequent modification 
of the rights, duties and obligations of citi- 
zens, private and public, are not authorized 
strictly under the Constitution." 

Attorney General Bates, on the 5th of July, 
18G1, transmitted to the House, in answer to 
a resolution of that body, an opinion based 
upon certain questions, one of which was as 
follows : " In the present time of a great and 
dangerous insurrection, has the President 
the discretionary power to cause to be arrested 
and held in custody persons known to have 
criminal intercourse with the insurgents, or 
persons against whom there is probable cause 
for suspicion of such criminal complicity?" 
In answer to this, and to other questions pro- 
pounded by the House, he says : 



" The argument may be briefly stated, thus: 
It is the President's bounden duty to put 
down the insurrection, as (in the language of 
the act of 1795) the 'combinations are too 
powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary 
course of judicial proceedings, or by the pow- 
ers vested in the marshals.' And this duty 
is imposed upon the President for the very 
reason that the courts and the marshals are 
too weak to perform it. The manner in which 
he shall perform that duty is not prescribed 
by any law, but the means of performing it 
are given in the plain language of the stat- 
utes, and they are all means of force — the 
militia, the army, and the navy. The end, 
the suppression of the insurrection, is required 
of him; the means and instruments to sup- 
press it are lawfully in his hands; but tha 
manner in which he shall use them is not pre- 
scribed, and could not be prescribed wither* 
a foreknowledge of all the future changed 
and contingencies of the insurrection. He is, 
therefore, necessarily thrown upon his discre- 
tion, as to the manner in which he will use 
his means to meet the varying exigences as 
they arise. If the insurgents assail the 
nation with an army, he may find it best to 
meet them with an army, and suppress the 
insurrection in the field of battle. If they 
seek to prolong the rebellion and gather 
strength by intercourse with foreign nations, 
he may choose to guard the coasts and close 
the ports with a navy, as one of the most 
efiScient means to suppress the insurrection, 
and if they employ spies and emissaries to 
gather information, to forward secret sup- 
plies, and to excite new insurrections in aid 
of the original rebellion, he may find it both 
prudent and humane to arrest and imprison 
them. And this may be done either for the 
purpose of bringing them to trial and con- 
dign punishment for their crimes, or they 
may be held in custody for the milder end of 
rendering them powerless for mischief until 
the exigency is past." 

Upon this same subject — how far a nation 
may go in the use of power, and the means 
within its reach, to preserve its own existence — 
Vattel, in his Law of Nations, pp. 5 and 6, 
well remarks: 

" Since, then, a nation is obliged to preserve 
itself, it has a right to every thing necessary 
for its preservation. For the law of nations 
gives us a right to every thing, without which 
we can not fulfill our obligation; otherwise, it 
would oblige ns to do impossibilities, or rather, 
would contradict itself in prescribing us a 
duty, and at the same time, debarring us of 
the only means of fulfilling it. * "••■' * * 
'■'■A nation or State has a rujht to every thiiig that 
can help to ward off imminent danger, and keep at 
a distanre whatever is capable of causing its ruin, 
and that from the very same reasons that establish 
its right- to the things necessary to its preservation." 

Of what martial law is. when it is to be 
called into existence, and to whom it applies, 
Benet, in his Military Law and Courts-Martial, 
page 14, has very tersely said: 

^^ Martial law, then, is that military rule and 
authority which exists in time of war, and is 
conferred by the laws of war, in relation to 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



263 



person and things under and within the scope 
of active military operations in carrying on 
the war, and which extinguishes or suspends 
civil rights, and the remedies founded upon 
them, for the time being, so far as it may ap- 
pear to be necessary in order to the full ac- 
complishment of the purpose of the war, the 
party who exercises it being liable in an ac- 
tion for any abuse of the authority thus con- 
fei-red. It is the application of military 
government — the government of force — to 
person and property within the scope of it, 
according tx the laws and usages of war, to 
the exclusion of the municipal government, 
in all respects where the latter would impair 
the efficiency of military law or military ac- 
tion.' See also Xorth American Review, Octo- 
ber, 1861. 

And again, Halleck, in his International 
Law and Laws of War, page 380, says that 
this right to declare, apply and exercise mar- 
tial law, is one of the rights of sovereignty, 
and is as essential to the existence of a 
State as is the right to declare and carry on 
war. He says: 

" We remark, in conclusion, that the right 
to declare, apply and exercise martial law, is 
one of the rights of sovereignty, and is as es- 
sential to the existence of a State as is the 
right to declare or carry on war. It is one 
of the incidents of war; and, like the power 
to take human life in battle, results directly 
and immediately from the fact that war le- 
gally exists. It is a power inherent in every 
government, and must be regarded and recog- 
nized by all other governments; but the ques- 
tion of the authority of any particular func- 
tionary to exercise this power, is a matter to 
be determined by local and not by interna- 
tional law. Like a declaration of a siege or 
blockade, the power of the officer who makes 
it is to be presumed until disavowed, and neu- 
trals who attempt to act in derogation of that 
authority, do so at their peril." 

We come now to the decisions of our civil 
tribunals touching these questions. In the 
case of Luther vs. Borden, heretofore referred 
to in the discussion of these principles, Chief 
Justice Taney, in delivering the opinion of the 
Court, said: 

"It was so understood and construed by the 
State authorities, and, unquestionably, a State 
may use its military power to put down an 
armed insurrection too strong to be controlled 
by the civil authority. The power is essential 
to the existence of every government, essential to the 
preservation of order and free institutions, and is as 
necessary to the States of this Union as to any other 
government. The State itself must determine 
Avhat degree of force the crisis demands. And 
if the government of Rhode Island deemed the 
armed opposition so formidable, and so rami- 
fied throughout the State, as to require the use 
of its military force, and the declaration of 
martial law, we see no ground upon which this 
Court can question its authority. It was a 
state of war; and the established government re- 
sorted to the rights and usages of war to maintain 
itself, and to overcome the unlawful opposition. 
And in that state of things, the officers en- 
gaged in its military service might lawfully 



arrest any one who, from the information be- 
fore them, they had reasonable grounds to be- 
lieve was engaged in the insurrection, and 
might order a house to be forcibly entered and 
searched, when there were reasonable grounds 
for supposing he might be there concealed. 
Without power to do this, martial law and the mil' 
itary array of the government would he mere par- 
ade, and rather encourage attack than repel iL No 
more force, however, can be used than is nec- 
essary to accomplish the object. And if the 
power is used for purposes of oppression, or 
any injury willfully done to person or prop- 
erty, the party by whom, or by whose order, it 
is committed, would undoubtedly be answera- 
ble." 

Here we have the entire question decided by 
the highest tribunal in the land, as to the 
right of any government to use its full mili- 
tary power, to resort to the rights and usages 
of war to maintain itself, and to overcome an 
unlawful opposition; or, in other word«, to put 
in force the laws of war, and enforce martial 
law. 

As to wherein resides the authority to de- 
clare martial law, or in what branch of the 
Government it resides, this Court does not de- 
cide: it does however recognize martial law, 
as a legitimate means of preserving the Gov- 
ernment in great emergencies. 

In the same case. Justice Woodbury dissent- 
ing, invieghing at great length against the 
existence of martial law, under any contin- 
gency under our Constitution, finally sums up 
the whole matter by the following admission: 
"The necessities of foreign war, it is conceded, 
sometimes impart great powers as to both 
things and persons, but they are modified by 
these necessities and subjected to numerous 
regulations of national law, justice and hu- 
manity. These, when they exist in modern 
times, while laying the persons who conduct 
war under some necessary authority of an 
extraordinary character, must limit, control 
and make its exercise under certain circum- 
stances, and in a certain manner, justifiable or 
void, with almost as much certainty and clear- 
ness as in provisions concerning municipal 
authority or duty. So may it be in some ex- 
treme stages on civil war. Among these my 
impression is that a state of war, whether for- 
eign or domestic, may exist, in the great perils 
of which it is competent, under its rights and 
on principles of national law, for a command- 
ing officer of troops, under the control of the 
Government, to extend certain rights of war, 
not only over his camp but its environs, and 
the near field of his military operations." 
C)th American Archives, 186. Johnson vs. Davis 
et al., 3 Marston, 535-51. 

On this rested the justification of one of the 
great commanders of this war and the age, in 
a transaction so well known at New Orleans. 

"But in civil strife, they are not to extend 
beyond the places where insurrection exists. ' 
3 Marston, 551. "Nor to portions of the State 
remote from the scene of military operations, 
nor after the resistance is over, nor to persons 
not connected with it, nor even within the 
scene can they extend to the person or prop- 
erty of citizens against whom no probable 



264 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



cause exists which may justify it." Sutton vs. 
Johnson, 1 D. ^ E., 549. "Nor to the property 
of any person without necessity or civil pre- 
cept." 

Here Justice Woodbury himself admits that, 
in certain contingencies, extraordinary pow- 
ers may be exercised under the aegis of mar- 
tial law, limited only by time, place and cir- 
cumstances. He calls them the "rights of 
war." I have named the same thing, and the 
law generally names it the "laws of war." 
He says, "they" [the rights of war] [the laws 
of war] "are not to extend beyond the places 
where insurrection exists, nor to the portions 
of the State remote from the scene of military 
operations, nor after the resistance is over, 
nor to persons not connected with it, nor to 
persons against whom no probable cause ex- 
ists." Of course, then, with these limitations, 
an arrest may be made legally and constitu- 
tionally under the exigences contemplated. 

The argument to which we have listened on 
the great danger of too much power being ex- 
ercised by the President, or the danger of this 
power being exercised by him, is very ably 
replied to by Chief Justice Taney, on page 44 
of 7th Howard. 

"It is said that this power of the President 
is dangerous to liberty, and may be abused. 
All power may be abused if placed in un- 
worthy hands. But it would be difficult, we 
think, to point out any other hands in which 
this power would be more safe, and, at the 
eame time, equally effectual. When citizens 
of the same State are in arms against each 
other, and the constituted authorities unable 
to execute the laws, the interposition must be 
prompt or it is of little value. The ordinary 
course of proceedings in courts of justice 
would be utterly unfit for the crisis. And 
the elevated office of the President, chosen as 
he is by the people of the United States, and 
the high responsibility he could not fail to feel 
when acting in a case of so much moment, ap- 
pear to furnish as strong safeguards against 
willful abuse of power as human prudence and 
foresight could well provide. At all events, 
it is conferred upon him by the Constitution 
and laws of the United States, and must, 
therefore, be respected and enforced in its ju- 
dicial tribunals." 

In a series of Prize cases decided by the 
Supreme Court, March 10th, 1863, the opin- 
ion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice 
Grier. Of the war powers of the President 
during this rebellion, he says: "By the Con- 
stitution, Congress alone has power to declare 
national or foreign war. It can not declare 
war against a State, or any number of States, 
by virtue of any clause in the Constitution. 
It confers on the President the whole execu- 
tive power; he is bound to take care that the 
laws be faithfully executed. He is Com- 
mander-in-Chief of the army and navy of 
the United States, and of tlie militia of the 
several States when called into the active ser- 
vice of the United States. He has no power 
to initiate or declare war, either against a 
foreign nation or a domestic State; but by the 
act of Congress of February 28th, 179">, and 
March 3, 1861, he is authorized to call out the 



militia and use the military and naval forces 
of the United States ; in case of invasion by 
a foreign nation, the President is not only au- 
thorized, but bound to resist force by force. 
He does not initiate a war, but is bound to ac- 
cept the challenge, without waiting for any 
special legislative authority. And whether 
the hostile party be a foreign invader, or 
States organized in rebellion, it is none the less 
a war, although the declaration of it be uni- 
lateral. Lord Stowell {1st Dodson, 247) ob- 
serves that it is none the less a war on that 
account, for war may exist without a declara- 
tion on either side." 

Thus we see that under the Constitution, it 
is the duty of the President to move forward, 
to enter upon the highway toward the sup- 
pression of a rebellion or insurrection, or to 
meet an invading foe, without any action of 
Congress, and without any declaration of 
war; and the route that he shall take, the 
means that he shall use to meet and suppress 
that rebellion, or insurrection, are solely in 
his own discretion. 

Again, Justice Grier says, in the same opin- 
ion: "Whether the President in fulfilling his 
duties as Commander-in-Chief, in suppressing 
an insurrection, has met with such armed 
hostile resistance, and with civil war of such 
alarming proportions as will compel him to 
accord to them a character of belligerents, is 
a question to be decided by him; and this 
Court must be governed by the decision and 
acts of the political department of the Gov- 
ernment to which this power is intrusted. It 
must determine what degree of power the crisis de- 
mands. The proclamation of the blockade is 
itself official and conclusive evidence to the 
Court that a state of war existed which de- 
manded and authorized a recourse to such a 
measure." Thus the Supreme Court of the 
United States, in the last cases brought before 
it in which this question was at all discussed, 
on March 10th, 1863, expressly decided that 
with the President rests the determination of 
the degree of power which the crisis demands 
shall be exercised, and with that determina- 
tion the Court can not interfere. The Presi- 
dent has determined that the degree of power 
necessary to suppress this rebellion is, to 
hold this class of offenders amenable to mar- 
tial law, and to trial by military courts; and 
his decision in this matter is final. Upon 
this same question, I find the following: 
"Moreover, when a military force is called 
out to repel invasion or suppress a rebellion, 
it is not placed under the direction of the ju- 
diciary, but under that of the executive. Sup- 
pose the military force, legally and constitu- 
tionally called into service for the purposes 
indicated, should find it necessary, in the 
course of its military operations, to occupy a 
field or garden, or destroy trees, or houses, 
belonging to some private person, can a court, 
by injunction, restrain them from committing 
such waste? It can do so in time of peace, 
and if its powers are to continue in time of 
war, the judiciary, and not the executive, 
will command the army and navy. The tak- 
ing or destroying of private property in such 
cases, is a military act, an act of war, and 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



265 



must bb governed by the laws of war; it is 
not provided for by the laws of peace. In the 
same way, a person taken and held by the 
military forces, whether before, or in, or after 
a battle, or without any battle at all, is virtu- 
ally a prisoner of war. No matter what his al- 
leged offense, whether he is a rebel, a traitor, 
a spy, or an enemy in arms, he is to be held 
and punished according to the laws of war, 
for these have been substituted for the laws 
of peace. And for a person so taken and held by 
the military authority, a writ of habeas corpus 
can have no effect, because, in the words of 
the United States Supreme Court, 'the ordin- 
ary course of justice would be utterly unfit 
for such a crisis.'" International and Laws of 
War, Halleck, p. 378. 

Finally, upon this question, the counsel for 
the accused, in their argument against the 
jurisdiction of this Court, rely mainly upon 
the amendments to the Constitution, articles 
5 and 6, which read as follows : 

"Art. 5. No person shall be held to answer for 
ft capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless 
onapresentmentorindictmentby a grand jury, 
except in cases arising in the land or naval 
forces, or in the militia when in actual ser- 
vice in time of war, or public danger; nor 
shall any person be subject for the same of- 
fense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or 
limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal 
case to be a witness against himself, nor be 
deprived of life, liberty, or property, without 
due process of law; nor shall private prop- 
erty be taken for public use, without just 
compensation. 

"Art. 6. In all criminal prosecutions, the 
accused shall enjoy fhe right to a speedy and 
public trial, by an impartial jury of the State 
and district wherein the crime shall have been 
committed, which district shall have been pre- 
viously ascertained by law, and to be in- 
formed of the nature and cause of the accusa- 
tion; to be confronted with the witnesses 
against him; to have compulsory process for 
obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have 
the assistance of counsel for his defense." 

Although a strict construction of these ar- 
ticles would seem to give force to such a con- 
clusion, yet in construing the diiferent parts 
of the Constitution, such a literal interpreta- 
tion of the amendments must be allowed to 
give way before the necessity of an efficient 
exercise of the war power which is vested in 
Congress by that instrument, and the war 
powers conveyed to the President when he is 
designated as Commander-in-Chief of the 
armies. This more liberal construction of the 
Constitution has, from a very early period of 
our history, been recognized by the legislature 
of the country. 

By turning to the 56th and 57th Articles of 
War, it M'ill be seen — if those articles have 
any force, and, so far as my knowledge ex- 
tends, their full power and force have never 
been questioned — these amendments to the 
Constitution do not apply to "all persons," 
nor to "all citizens" of the United States: nor 
are they applicable to all circumstances and 
emergencies. Those Articles of War read as 
follows: 



"Art. 56. Whosoever shall relieve the ene- 
my with money, victuals, or ammunition, or 
shall knowingly harbor or protect an enemy, 
shall suffer death, or such <7ther punishment 
as shall be ordered by the sentence of a court- 
martial. 

"Art. 57. Whosoever shall be convicted of 
holding correspondence with, or giving in- 
telligence to, the enemy, either directly or in- 
directly, shall suffer death, or such other pun- 
ishment as shall be ordered by the sentence of 
a court-martial." 

Those articles conferring this jurisdiction, 
were adopted by the original Congress of the 
Confederation; and their terms and effect re- 
mained unchanged at the time of the forma- 
tion of the Constitution. In 1806 a slight 
modification in their language was introduced ; 
the substitution of "whosoever" for "all per- 
sons;" and thus a Congress composed of many 
of the original founders of the Republic, sub- 
stantially reaffirmed the jurisdiction of mil- 
itary courts as to this class of offenders. This 
fact, that no alteration has been made in them 
by any subsequent Congress, either in time of 
peace, or during any war in which the coun- 
try has been engaged, may be regarded as an 
unmistakable indication that the amendments 
to the Constitution conferring the right of 
trial by jury, etc., must yield, in a time like 
the present, to such a vigorous exercise of the 
war power as may be essential to the preserv- 
ation of the Government. 

Upon the necessity of the declaration and 
enforcement of martial law in the present 
cases, I have but a word to say. I believe with 
the Supreme Court, that this is a matter en- 
tirely within the discretion of the commander- 
in-chief of the armies; that that political de- 
partment of the Government, to which it prop- 
erly belongs, must wield the necessary force 
to suppress this rebellion; what that necessary 
force is, he alone can determine. I may be 
permitted to add, however, that in my judg- 
ment, and, I believe in the judgment of every 
man who has carefully and calmly considered 
the state of the country, and the circumstan- 
ces of the times when these arrests were made, 
it was necessary that these parties should be 
held amenable to martial law, and to trial by 
a military tribunal. It has been admitted by 
the counsel for the accused, (Mr. Gordon,) that 
if martial law does exist here, then these par- 
ties may possibly be triable by a military tri- 
bunal; without that preceding fact, he says 
they can not be. In other parts of his argu- 
ment, he claims that even did the exigences 
of the time require the arrest of these parties, 
and the enforcement of martial law, after their 
arrest they should have been turned over to 
the civil authorities for trial. To that I an- 
swer: all laws — whether they be civil, mari- 
time, or military — have legitimate tribunals 
for their administration; the common law, by 
the common law courts; maritime law, by 
maritime courts; and the military law, by 
courts-martial. Martial law is as clear and 
well defined as any other law; and it is but 
proper that it should have a tribunal by which 
it shall be administered; the tribunal in thia 
case is a Military Commission. It is better 



266 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



and more in accordance with the progress and 
tendencies of the age, that this law should be 
administered by a court governed by all the 
checks and balances of ordinary courts of jus- 
tice, than by a military commander, as in 
former times. 

In this case, the accused have had the bene- 
fit of an open trial, conducted according to 
all the known rules of the common law. A 
majority of the Court is composed of men who 
have achieved wide reputation in the State as 
lawyers. There is no right granted to an ac- 
cused in any civil court in the land, that has 
not been freely and fully given in the pro- 
gress of this trial. The questions have been 
asked and answered orally; all objections 
have been discussed in open court, and the 
accused have had the advantage of having 
every M'ord uttered by the witnesses or by the 
counsel in discussion, accurately recorded, 
and to that record they have had full and free 
access to see that it contains no error or omis- 
sion that might, in the slightest degree, prej- 
udice their cause. Wherein, then, regarding 
it as a matter of justice and right, are these 
accused wronged by this proceeding ? They 
do not complain of the persons who compose 
this Court; they themselves have passed eulo- 
gies upon their high and honorable character; 
they have made no complaint of the mode of 
conducting this case; they admit that they 
have received every courtesy and every right 
they could justly claim at the hands of the 
Government; wherein, then, I ask again, is the 
injustice of trying these accused by this Court, 
according to all the known rules and princi- 
ples of the common law? 

In considering the question of the necessity 
of martial law obtaining to the extent of try- 
ing this peculiar class of oflFenders by a mili- 
tary tribunal, we must examine the circum- 
stances as they appeared to the authority who 
ordered these arrests, and sent these cases be- 
fore this Court for trial. Upon this question, 
Chief Justice Taney, in Mitchell vs. Harmony, 
13th Howard, page 134, says: 

"It is the emergency that gives the right, 
and the emergency must be shown to exist be- 
fore the taking can be justified. In deciding 
upon this necessity, however, the state of the facts, 
as they appeared to the officer, at the time he acted, 
must govern the decision; for he must necessarily 
act upon the information of others, as well as his 
own observation." 

In answer to a question of the accused, 
through their counsel, Mr. Cofi'roth, Major 
General Hovey, in speaking of his action in 
making these arrests, very pertinently says: 
"It was based upon my general knowledge 
of affairs in Indiana, the condition of the 
country, and Mr. Milligan's action in regard 
to it, together with the dangers that surround- 
ed ys at that time." The counsel asked him: 
" To what action do you refer ? " The General 
answered: "To the conspiracy against the 
authority of the United States." "What par- 
ticular actions of Mr. Millipan, in the mat- 
ter?" He answers: "Mr. Milligan, I under- 
ptood, from reliable authority, was a major 
general of the organization, and had taken 
steps to aid it and carry on revolution." And 



this answer, the General says, applies to all 
the accused. Here, then, are the circumstances 
under which the Commanding General of this 
District acted in arresting these parties, and 
sending them before this military tribunal for 
trial ; these are the circumstances, as they 
appeared to him; and he would certainly have 
failed in doing his duty, had he acted other- 
wise. I submit that the facts, as developed 
before this Court, entirely sustain the opinion 
formed by Genei'al Hovey, as to the necessity 
for making these arrests, and the necessity for 
trial before this Commission. It has been 
proved beyond question, that a conspiracy, 
more extensive, more perfect in its organiza- 
tion, and more damnable in its designs, never 
was concocted or brought into existence under 
any government since governments were first 
instituted. It has been proved that these pai-- 
ties now on trial, were members of that con- 
spiracy; all, excepting one, holding military 
positions in this organization; that this con- 
spiracy existed in almost every town and 
county of the State; and not only in this 
State, but in the States of Missouri, Kentucky, 
Illinois and Ohio; that it was thoroughly 
organized, and partially armed; that all the 
objects contemplated by the order, were ille- 
gal, treasonable and damnable; and that its 
lurking venom permeated all grades of society. 
Under such circumstances, would the Govern- 
ment have been safe in issuing a venire for a 
grand or petit jury to investigate and try 
these cases? Could you have kept from either 
of these juries a sufficient number of this same 
organization to have defeated the whole ends 
of justice? I state what is well known to ev- 
ery lawyer in the land,* that no jury could 
possibly have been convened in this State, by 
the ordinary process of impanneling a jury, 
that would not have contained at least one 
member of this organization; and that one 
member would have been sufiBcient to acquit 
any criminal tried before them. In a land 
where a conspiracy has so contaminated all 
classes of society, the ordinary avenues of 
justice are obstructed, and the Government, 
under such circumstances, by the ordinary 
channels, is powerless to punish or to save. 

I submit, with all due deference to the opin- 
ion of the eminent counsel on behalf of the 
accused, that at the time these arrests were 
made, this conspiracy, this intended insurrec- 
tion had not heeii abandoned. As the evidence in 
this case, and subsequent events, have most 
clearly shown, the Order of American Knights, 
or of the "Sons of Liberty," was never more 
flourishing, more determined, and more ven- 
omous than at that very time. 

And had the leaders of this conspiracy, these 
military chieftains, been arrested, brought be- 
fore a civil tribunal, and released upon bail, 
would that have been a sure way of prevent- 
ing the consummation of this conspiracy? 
Would it not rather have hastened the catas- 
trophe you are trying to ward off, and simply 
give them to understand that the Government 
had some knowledge of their criminal intents? 
I submit, then, that the danger was imminent; 
requiring prompt action, and a strong and 
vigorous arm; that there was an overpowering 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



267 



necessity for military interference on the part 
of the Government; and the loyal people of 
this nation would, with one voice, have cried: 
"Shame, shame," if those who had the power 
failed to meet the emergency. For this proc- 
lamation of martial law, and for this kind of 
arrests, the President of the United States has 
been tried by the highest court short of the 
court of Heaven; he has been tried upon this 
very issue by a tribunal composed of twenty- 
five millions of freemen, and the verdict, in- 
stead of being condemnation, has been : " Well 
done, good and faithful servant!" Public 
opinion, that power which Talleyrand declared 
to Napoleon was more omnipotent than he and 
all his armies, has indorsed the necessity for 
these arrests, and the trial of these parties be- 
fore courts that can act with a rapidity and 
vigor unknown to civil tribunals. That pow- 
er, public opinion, is the court of last resort. 
Its voice is like the resistless sweep of the arm 
of Jehovah; before which all powers, govern- 
ments, statesmanship, and judicial tribunals 
must yield and change, as it, in its omnipo- 
tence, shall direct. 

CONSPIR.i^CY PER SE. 

We come now to the consideration of 
whether the Order of American Knights, or 
Order of Sons of Liberty, was a conspiracy 
■per se. And first, we shall direct attention, 
briefly, to the argument of Mr. Coffroth, coun- 
sel for Mr. Milligan, on 'this point. And in 
doing so, I deem it my duty to say that it is 
one of the most singular arguments I have 
ever met with, or have ever known to be made 
in the trial of any cause. Its tone is disre- 
spectful, to say the least, to this tribunal, and 
insulting to the American people, and its 
statements are frequently at variance with 
the proofs. Were it not that I see Mr. Cof- 
froth's name signed to this argument, and that 
I heard him read it as his own production, I 
would have been strong in the belief that it 
emanated from the bitter and disloyal heart 
of the accused, L. P. Milligan, himself. 

The counsel starts off with the assertion 
that this is "more of a political than a crimi- 
nal prosecution;" and he says to this Court, 
"you are sitting in judgment upon political 
opponents, for alleged political offenses." The 
first assertion is untrue, if he means by the 
use of the word "political" to class the ac- 
cused simply as Democrats, because the ma- 
jority of this Court will tell you that they 
have never been any thing else. If he means 
by this political division, to class the accused 
as against the Government — opposed to its 
institution, and the Court in favor of them — 
then they are political opponents. This is no 
political prosecution. I drew up the charges 
against these men, and signed my name to 
them, simply because I had reason to believe 
they were criminals ; I knew nothing of their 
politics, or of their political standing; no one 
informed me, before these charges were pre- 
ferred, what their political standing was ; I 
desired no such information ; I desired sim- 
ply to bring to justice men who were trying 
to aid traitors in arms against this Govern- 
ment. I next come to the assertion, "During 



the whole progress of this trial, partisan 
hate, with blind and fiendish malignity, has 
been demanding blood." I can not, of course, 
say what the gentleman may have heard, or 
determine the source of his information, but 
I have heard of no partisan demand for 
blood ; I have seen no blind or fiendish ma- 
lignity exhibited on the part of any citizens 
of this Republic toward the accused. It is 
true that when the claims of these traitors, 
these conspirators, were made known to the 
people of the land, those who were resting in 
the peaceful security of their homes, started 
back appalled at the gulf which was opened 
to their vision, at their very feet. The cold- 
blooded villainy of the scheme that these men 
deliberately discussed in their councils, and 
proceeded, with premeditation and delibera- 
tion, to execute, appalled and shocked the 
moral sense not only of this entire nation, 
but of the whole civilized world. 

Upon what a conspiracy per st is, there can 
be no difference of opinion ; it is a corrupt 
agreeing together by two or more persons, to 
do some unlawful thing, either as a means or 
an end ; or, in other words, to do some legal 
thing in an illegal manner, or directly to 
commit an illegal act by combination or 
agreement. 

We come next to the parts of this order set 
out by the gentleman in his argument; and 
the whole matter can be set at rest by saying 
that all those parts of the ritual given by the 
gentleman, are taken from the Vestibule de- 
gree. I speak now of the declaration of 
principles. The gentleman did not go even to 
the first degree of the order. If he had looked 
a little further, he would have found that the 
principles enunciated in the first degree of 
this Order of American Knights, or Order of 
Sons of Liberty, are not " the very principles 
upon which our Government was adminis- 
tered in the better days of the Republic." To 
understand clearly the ends aimed at by this 
organization, and whether those ends were le- 
gal or illegal, we must place ourselves as 
nearly as possible at the stand-point of the 
organization; we must consider the opinions 
and principles of Government held by its 
members; we must consider the circumstances 
of the nation — as this Court has a right judi- 
cially to do, without proof — and the attitude 
of these members of the order toward that na- 
tion, during this great crisis. 

We find the Goverament engaged in a strug- 
gle for its very existence; calling into requi- 
sition all the power and force she can com- 
mand. She is contending with an enemy so 
great in numbers, and so powerful, that as yet, 
after nearly four years' struggle, exerting her 
utmost strength, she has been unable to over- 
come it. And where did the men composing 
this organization stand, upon the Tital ques- 
tion of the maintainance of the national in- 
tegrity ? I ask the Court, does the proof show 
that they were standing by the Government, 
aiding it cheerfully with their means, with their 
sympathy, and with their strength ? Or does the 
proofyshow, on the contrary, that they were op- 
posed to this war waged for the life of the nation ^ 
that they were engaged in disseminating tha 



268 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



doctrine that such a war was unconstitutional 
and unauthorized, and giving encouragement 
and sympathy to the enemies of the Govern- 
ment? This war wa& begun by those now in 
arms against the Government, to maintain the 
doctrine that a State had the right, at will, to 
secede, and join its fortune to a separate na- 
tionality; ov. in other words, that this Gov- 
ernment of ours is but a combination of sep- 
arate sovereignties, exercising the special 
powers delegated by those separate sover- 
eignties, and that at will that compact could 
be dissolved. This, I believe, is a fair state- 
ment of the origin of the contest going on in 
this nation to-day — what the reasons were of 
those in arms against the Government for de- 
siring a separate nationality, I do not stop to 
inquire or discuss. These, then, are the prin- 
ciples that our enemies are attempting to 
maintain by force of arms. 

AVe have charged in the pleadings in this 
case, in the first place, "Conspiracy against 
the Government of the United States;" and 
under that charge, have set out in Specifica- 
tion 1st, that the accused did join themselves 
to this secret order " for the purpose of over- 
throwing the Government and duly consti- 
tuted authorities of the United States ; " and 
under the Second Specification of that charge, 
that they did combine with certain parties 
" to adopt and impart to others the creed or rit- 
ual of a secret, unlawful society, or order;" 
"denying the authority of the United States 
to coerce to submission certain rebellious 
citizens of said United States." Specification 
3d charges that they did conspire with certain 
parties "to overthrow and render powerless 
the Government of the United States" by 
forming and organizing this unlawful soci- 
ety or order; and that they did assist in ex- 
tending this order whose purpose was to crip- 
ple and render powerless the efforts of the 
Government in suppressing a then existing 
and formidable rebellion. Specification 4th 
sets out the manner by which they were to 
carry into execution these unlawful schemes. 
Now, let us see whether, prima Jacie, there is 
any thing in the principles enunciated by this 
order, that would support these charges and 
specifications, outside and entirely separate 
from any proof in this case. 

The Court will bear in mind our statement 
of the issue upon which the war is being 
waged in this country to-day. I refer them 
now to Article G, in the lesson of the First De- 
gree, of the Order of Sons of Liberty, which 
says: "The Government designated the Uni- 
ted States of America, has no sovereignty, 
because that is an attribute belonging to the 
people in their respective State organizations;" 
is not that really the foundation stone of the 
present rebellion? Article 7 says, in accord- 
ance with this principle, " tlie Fedei'al Gov- 
ernment can exercise only delegated power: 
hence, if those who shall liave been chosen to 
administer that Government, shall assume to 
exercise power not delegated, they should be 
regarded and dealt with as usurpers." This 
clause of the ritual should be borne in mind 
while seeking to discover the meaning of the 
obliffation. 



It will be remembered by the Court that of 
all the witnesses who have spoken upon this 
point, and who have undertaken to explain for 
the accused their principles, and their under- 
standing of the intent and purposes of this 
organization, there has not been one but has 
claimed that the Government was exercising 
usurped powers, powers not delegated. 

The witness Corlew, one of Mr. Milligau's 
witnesses as to character, and, like nearly' all 
the rest, a member of the order, when the di- 
rect question was put to him, whether he con- 
sidered the Government a usurpation, de- 
clared that he did; and it was only after being 
"doctored" from the evening of one day to 
the morning of the next, by the astute coun- 
sel of Mr. Milligan, that he was brought up 
to the point of explaining that he did not 
mean to claim that the Government was a 
usurpation, but only that there were cer- 
tain usurpations on the part of the Adminis- 
tration ; or, in other words, that the Adminis- 
tration was exercising undelegated powers. 
The witness Bird, a member of the Legisla- 
ture, and a member of this order; Judge Lough- 
ridge, also a member of the order, and Bur- 
ton, a witness for Humphreys, also a member 
of the order, all claimed that the Government 
was exercising powers not delegated. Having 
ascertained from the witnesses for the defense 
their opinion of the acts of the Government, 
and whether they sympathize with her, or 
with her enemies, aifd having found that they 
believe that the Government is exercising un- 
delegated power, we refer to the ritual of the 
order to which they have attached themselves 
by binding oaths — under the penalty of 
death if violated — to ascertain how they look 
upon the Government when she is exercising 
undelegated powers. I refer you again to Ar- 
ticle 7. "Hence, if those who shall have been 
chosen to administer that Government, shall 
assume (and they say under oath that they 
have thus assumed) to exercise power not 
delegated, they should be regarded and dealt 
with as usurpers." 

We proceed to Article 10, which says: 
"Whenever the ofiicials, to whom the people 
have intrusted the powers of the Government, 
shall refuse to administer it in strict accord- 
ance with its Constitution, and shall assume 
and exercise power or authority not dele- 
gated, it is the inherent right and imperative 
duty of the people to resist such officials, and 
if need be, expel them by force of arms. 
Such resistance is not revolution, but is solely 
tlie assertion of right." Now, with the in- 
terests of a great nation resting upon your 
decision, I ask yoti, gentlemen of this Court, 
is it lawful or unlawful for a set of men to 
combine and agree together that whenever, 
in their judgment, the Government is exer- 
cising powers not delegated, it shall be ex- 
pelled by force of arms ? Gentlemen, what 
say you? Is it not admitted by all loyal men 
that the only legal mode of setting aside a 
Government which may be exercising pow- 
ers not delegated is, if the President, by im- 
peachment or by ballot; if, then, it is illegal 
to expel the officials of the Government by force 
of arms, this organization is a conspiracy ^er<e. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



269 



Article, 11 of the Ritual of the Order of 
Sons of Liberty says : " It is incompatible 
■with the history and nature of our system of 
Government, that Federal authority should 
coerce by arms a sovereign State;" and Art. 
12 declares, "Upon the preservation of the 
sovereignty of the States, depends the preser- 
vation of civil and personal liberty." Gen- 
tlemen, are these, or are they not the princi- 
ples enunciated and upheld by those in arms 
against this Government ? Does the dissemi- 
nation of these doctrines by a large body of 
men in these Northern States tend to weaken 
the Government, or to strengthen it ? Does it, 
or does it not tend to encourage and strengthen 
the rebellion ? They are the principles dia- 
metrically opposed to those for which our 
Government is struggling, and for which our 
armies are fighting. I ask you, is an organ- 
ization that meets in midnight council, to dis- 
seminate these damnable doctrines, loyal or 
disloyal? Is it legal or illegal? 

We come now to the obligation; and in con- 
sidering that, as I have before remarked, we 
must do so from their stand-point. In reading 
the argument of the counsel, (Mr. CoflFroth,) I 
am astonished that he should give this Court 
credit for so little acumen or judgment. The 
part of the obligation which the gentleman 
cites, is as follows: "I do further swear that I 
will at all times, if needs be, take up arms in 
the cause of the oppressed — in my own coun- 
try first of all — against any monarch, prince, 
potentate, power, or government usurped, 
which may be found in arms, waging war 
against a people or peoples, who are endeavor- 
ing to establish or have inaugurated a govern- 
ment for themselves, in accordance with, and 
founded upon, the eternal principles of truth, 
which I have sworn in the Vestibule, and now 
in this presence do s^vear to maintain invio- 
late, and defend with my life." The sentence 
following this, and which the gentleman has 
omitted to quote, is as follows: "This I do 
promise, without reservation or evasion of 
mind; without regard to the name, station, 
condition or designation of the invading or 
coercing power, whether it shall arise within 
or come from without! " 

In considering the first part of this obliga- 
tion, the gentleman proceeds to "analyze" it; 
and says: "We will therefore confine our re- 
marks to the last proposition; that is, as to a 
power or government usurped; and I here ask 
the learned Judge Advocate if he is prepared 
to proclaim to the world that this Government 
is an usurped one, in order to make this obli- 
gation to take up arms apply to it?" Now 
this is a singular manner of arguing the ques- 
tion; it pre-supposes want of ordinary intelli- 
gence on the part of this Court, and all con- 
cerned in this trial. When the members of 
the Order of American Knights, or Sons of 
Liberty, off"er to take up arms against any 
power or government usurped, we do not ask, 
what government is really usurped? but what 
government do they claim to be usurped? 
And what government do they consider and 
claim to be exercising undelegated or usurped 
powers? Messrs. Corlew, Bird, Loughridge 
and Burton, all witnesses for the defense, have 



explicitly stated that the Government, or the 
President, was exercising authority and pow- 
ers not delegated; and therefore, according to 
Article 7 — to which they have all subscribed — 
was a usurpation, and should be dealt with as 
such; and, according to Article 10, should be 
expelled by force of arms. The obligation but 
reiterates the doctrines enunciated in Article 
10 of the Ritual. 

I do not need to go to the statements of the 
witnesses on the part of the accused, to show 
that these are their principles, but I will take 
the statements of the accused himself; for I 
take it that the accused must be bound by the 
statements which he submits by his counsel. 
He says: "I have no purpose to conceal the 
views of Mr. Milligan; and freely admit that 
he may have said, what every intelligent man 
in America knows, that both the President, the 
Congress and the military authorities have 
each exercised particular powers, that did not 
belong to them." The gentleman asserts be- 
fore this Court, that not only the President, 
but Congress and the military authorities 
have exercised undelegated powers; therefore, 
according to the principles sworn and sub- 
scribed to by members of the Order, they are 
all usurpers, and should be expelled from their 
places by force of arms; not only the Presi- 
dent, but Congress and the army. Mr. Cof- 
froth, it only needs that your client be turned 
loose to walk in the streets, take up his 
arms and join the rebel ranks, to carry out the 
doctrines that you enunciate for him in this 
Court. 

When I stated, at the opening of my review 
of this organization, that the gentleman had 
falsified the record, had misrepresented the 
proof, I said what I stand ready here to prove 
from the record. But half a page below where 
the gentleman makes the assertion just quoted, 
he says: "But if anyone should, unfortunately 
for the defense, be of opinion that the Govern- 
ment is a usurpation, still I insist, that neither 
the defendants as individuals, nor the Order 
of American Knights or Sons of Liberty, ever 
entertained or expressed such sentiments, but 
that they have ever treated the Government, 
including the President, the Courts, the Con- 
gress, and the Army, as legitimate, each in 
its own sphere." In reply to this, I simply 
submit the statement of the accused, Mr. 
Milligan himself, through his counsel, Mr. 
Cofl'roth, and the statements of the wit- 
nesses just referred to, and the Ritual of 
the organization, to which every member of 
the Sons of Liberty has sworn allegiance. In 
addition, I quote from the resolution sent up 
to the Grand Council by Mr. Milligan, by the 
hand of Mr. Winters, the preamble to which 
says: "A crisis has arisen in the history of 
the Federal Government, in relation to the 
rights of the States, whether delegated or re- 
served; the manifest usurpations of undele- 
gated powers by the President; the utter dis- 
regard of all constitutional guarantees of lib- 
erty, looking constantly to the subjugation of 
States and the establishment of a centralized 
despotism, already fill us with alarm for the 
cause of civil liberty in America." 

To show that the accused, Mr. Milligan, is 



270 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



not the saint of submission that he has been 
pictured by his counsel, I quote the following 
resolutions: ^^ Resolved, That the right to alter 
or abolish their Government, whenever it fails 
to secure the blessings of liberty, is one of the 
inalienable rights of the people, that can never 
be surrendered; nor is the right to maintain 
a Government that does secure the blessings of 
liberty, less sacred and inalienable; therefore 
we declare that patriotism and manhood alike 
enjoin upon us resistance to usurpation as the 
highest and holiest duty of freemen." That is 
the first resolution. Resolution 6 says: "That 
there is a point at which submission merges 
the man in the slave, and resistance becomes 
a duty. Whether that point, in the history of 
the times, has arrived, may be debated ; but 
we will resist, by force, any attempt to abridge 
the elective franchise, whether by the intro- 
duction of illegal votes, under military author- 
ity, or the attempt by Federal officers to intim- 
idate the citizens by threats of oppression." 
It will be remembered that these resolutions, 
drawn up by Mr. Milligan, and sent by him 
to the Grand Council, were published in 
pamphlet form, and circulated in the county 
temples. The pamphlet contained also the ad- 
dress of Dodd. These two documents prove 
the old adage that great minds often think 
alike. Here are the Grand Commander of the 
State and a Major General of the Order issu- 
ing documents to the world, drawn up at dif- 
ferent times and in different places, but both 
enunciating substantially the same principles, 
and, in many instances, using almost precisely 
the same words and phraseology. I will make 
but one or two quotations from this address; 
which has been so frequently referred to, that 
the Court will remember it: "If these men be 
prolonged in power, they must either consent 
to be content to exercise the power delegated 
by the people, or, by the gods, they must prove 
themselves physically the stronger. This po- 
sition is demanded by every true member of 
this fraternity; lionor, life — ^aye, more than 
life — the virtue of our wives and daughters 
demand it; and if you intend to make this 
organization of any practical value, you will 
do one of two things — either take steps to 
work the political regeneration of the party 
with which we are affiliated, up to this stand- 
ard, or relying upon ourselves, determine at 
once our plan of action." 

To show the construction put upon the obli- 
gation by members of the order, and what 
they concede were the purposes of the organ- 
ization, I quote from Dodd's speech, in which 
he gives what he claims to be the opinions 
and counsel of the Supreme Commander, Mr. 
Vallandigham. This document was issued by 
Dodd for general use in the order. He could 
not have used Mr. Vallandighara's name in 
this manner without its having been brought 
to his notice; we may, therefore, reasonably 
conclude, that in this publication the views of 
Mr. Vallandigham were given as Mr. Dodd 
had received them from him, and that the Su- 
preme Commander of this Order gave the 
correct exposition of its intents and pur- 
poses. 

In speaking of Vallandigham, Dodd says: 



"He counsels late action on the part of State 
conventions; thinks Ohio is called too soon- 
advising that Indiana should have hers, say, 
first of June. He finally judges that the 
Washington power will not yield up its power, 
until it is taken from them by an indignant 
people, by force of arms. He intimates that 
parties — men and interests — will divide into 
two classes, and that a conflict will ensue for 
the mastery." 

Mr. Dodd then continues: ^^Sons of Liberly, 
arise! The day is rapidly approaching, in the 
which you can make good your promises to 
your country.' The furnace is being heated 
that will prove your sincerity — the hour for 
daring deeds is not distant — let the watch- 
word be, Onward! And let the result bless 
mankind with Republican Government, in this, 
our beloved land, to their latest posterity." 
Does this utterance of Mr. Dodd send forth any 
uncertain sound? Can it be said that any 
member of this order who had taken the ob- 
ligation, and had heard read the lesson of 
only the first degree, could not understand 
what was meant by this manifesto? Harrison 
swears that copies of this pamphlet were sent 
to Messrs. Milligan, Humphreys,iind he thinks, 
Bowles. Even if Mr. Milligan had not re- 
ceived one of the documents in which were 
published his own resolutions, by the ordinary 
channels of the order; beyond question, he 
would seek to obtain a copy; and can it well 
be claimed, that with this document, published 
soon after the 22d of February, in his hand, 
he still had no knowledge of the contemplated 
uprising or insurrection by the members of 
this order: that he had no idea of its illegal 
purposes or intents? Can any rational man 
read these utterances of Mr Milligan himself, 
or the obligation and oaths of this ritual, and 
say that he was ignorant of the evil purposes 
of this organization? 

This bitterness appears to culminate in his 
hatred of General Carrington. I do not won- 
der that Mr. Milligan should entertain this 
feeling, for it is mainly due to the General 
that the evil designs of the order were brought 
to light and frustrated. Out of justice to a 
brother officer, who has served his country 
faithfully and well, and with a singleness of 
purpose, I am compelled to notice some of the 
vile slanders and misrepresentations con- 
tained in this argument. He says, first, " It 
may have been some bosom friend of General 
Carrington a la Stidger and Zumro." And 
again : " What a grand spectacle it would 
present! How proud would be the bearing of 
that brave and gallant General who has, by his 
paid spies and informers, been so industri- 
ously extending this order — duping innocent 
men into it, initiating rebel officers, carrying 
messages between Dodd & Co. and traitors 
in arms, and facilitating by all possible means 
the grand carnival of blood that was to have 
taken place at this city on the 16th of last 
August." The true meaning and eflfect of 
which is that General Carrington was aiding 
this conspiracy ; for the counsel explicitly 
says that he was " facilitating by all possible 
means the grand carnival of blood that was 
to have taken place at this city on the 16th of 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



271 



last August." The counsel knew, as he 
penned those words, that it was a vile slander 
and a falsehood ; he knew that General Car- 
rington's sole purpose was to bring to justice 
the members of this conspiracy, and that to 
do this, he had to employ men to become 
acquainted with their designs and movements, 
and to apprise him of the same. He neither 
extended, nor aided in extending the order. 
The men who joined the order for the purpose 
of revealing its acts to the Government, did 
simply what they had to do to keep suspicion 
from them; they acted the part of members of 
the order. Again the counsel says: "And 
yet Carringtou paid and encouraged Stidger 
to extend, as rapidly as possible, an organiza- 
tion that is claimed to be treasonable." Now, 
the proof shows that Stidger was never in any 
manner hired, or paid a dollar by General 
Carrington; that he was never employed to 
extend the order by any person outside of the 
organization. Stidger received instructions 
from Captain Jones, Provost Marshal at Lou- 
isville, to keep himself advised of the move- 
ments and designs of the members of this or- 
der, and by him was employed and paid. He 
was appointed or elected Grand Secretary of 
the order, and performed the duties of that of- 
fice, no more and no less. Dr. Zumro acted in 
like manner. Why this bitterness toward the 
men that have revealed the designs and pur- 
poses of the order, if it be so pure in its or- 
ganization and acts? On no single point 
have the accused attempted to rebut or dis- 
prove the statements of Stidger; they have 
not dared to do so; nor have they questioned 
the probity of any of Mr. Stidger's state- 
ments, but have indulged in bitter, unworthy 
vituperation against him. 

The counsel then proceeds to a considera- 
tion of the "obnoxious obligation," to ascertain 
if it is not " consistent with patriotism and most 
devoted loyalty." He says : "let us, therefore, 
examine whether the contingency has hap- 
pened, upon which they obligated themselves 
to take up arms, with reference to the subject 
matter, and the people or peoples for whom 
and in whose behalf they propose to volunteer. 
And we inquire, where is that people • who 
have established or inaugurated a Govern- 
ment of their own free choice, and in accord- 
ance with and founded upon the eternal prin- 
ciples of truth?' " He says further, "It will 
not do to say that the Southern Confederacy 
is that people, for it would be a eulogy on Jeff 
Davis' government more glowing than any 
son of liberty ever uttered. Is their cause 
that of the oppressed? Is our Government a 
usurpation ? Is the Southern Confederacy 
founded upon the eternal principles of truth?" 
I answer him ; the members of this order have 
said that their cause was that of the op- 
pressed; you have said that our Government, 
now waging this war against rebellion, is a 
usurpation; you have said that the Southern 
Confederacy is founded upon the eternal prin- 
ciples of truth ; and therefore we try and 
judge you by the principles you yourselves 
have enunciated. 

Again, this singular argument says: "and 
I submit, that the conduct of Mr. Bingham is 



in commendable contrast to that of the au- 
thorities. So soon as he was informed of 
Dodd's proposed plot, his best efforts were at 
once directed to paralyze that embryo rebel- 
lion; while, on the other hand, the authorities 
knew it all, long before Mr. Bingham did ; 
and instead of nipping it in the bud, were 
nursing and encouraging it, so that it might 
bring forth fully ripe fruit." Does the gen- 
tleman think that he can make any fair 
minded men believe that the Government au- 
thorities, whose lives, fortunes and honors are 
staked on the faithful discharge of their du- 
ties, were " nursing and encouraging " this 
accursed conspiracy ? He says further : " The 
evidence of Stidger, their detective and wit- 
ness, shows that while under the pay and 
direction of Carrington, and with his consent 
and approbation," etc. I here assert, that the 
evidence of Stidger shows that he never was 
under the pay or direction of General Car- 
rington ; and I appeal to the record; "and 
with his consent and approbation, that he 
(Stidger) was extending the order as rapidly 
as possible, both in Indiana and Kentucky, 
that with the same approbation he initiated 
rebel ofl&cers, and carried messages between 
Dodd and others and officers in the Confeder- 
ate service, and afforded every facility to Dodd 
and his immediate confederates to arrange, 
perfect and accomplish the inauguration of 
civil war in Indiana, keeping the authorities 
here advised of every movement, by regular 
and frequent reports — and all this for the sole 
purpose of influencing the then pending elec- 
tions." I say to the Court, that there is not 
one particle of evidence on the part of Stid- 
ger, or any other witness, "that while under 
the pay and direction of Carrington, and with 
his consent and approbation, he (Stidger) was 

extending the order in Indiana and 

Kentucky," or that General Carrington knew 
any thing about it until after the reports had 
been submitted by Stidger; nor that with the 
"consent and approbation " of General Car- 
rington, Stidger "carried messages between 

Dodd and officers in the Confederate 

service." I ask the gentleman, where, from 
the first page of the record to the last, there 
is one particle of evidence to show that any 
of these things were done for the " purpose 
of influencing the then pending elections ?" 
And this assertion is repeated again and again. 
This argument, itself, is the only political 
thing that I have seen in any way connected 
with this trial. Referring to the military au- 
thorities of the Government, he says: "They 
were fully advised of the existence of what 
they claim to have been a most infernal con- 
spiracy against the peace of the State — they 
witnessed the maturing of the scheme — they 
saw the preparation of the brand that was to 
flame into civil war. Yes, they knew it all — 
and yet raised not a finger to stop it, until it 
was throttled by the very men who are de- 
nounced as its sympathizers. Like the tiger 
that stands at the edge of his jungle, watch- 
ing his victim, and as the unfortunate trav- 
eler comes along, springs upon him, crushes 
his bones and laps up his blood, so they looked 
with savage delight upon the proposed upris- 



272 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



ing — regarding no other consequence except 
its probable influence upon the elections." 
How far in the scale of untruth and want of 
self-respect must a man have descended, to 
make these bald, vile, slanderous assertions, 
without a scintilla of proof to found them 
upon ! 

I quote but little more, and then leave this 
argument — or rather this accumulation of li- 
bels — to the fate it deserves. " It seemed to 
matter little to them even though the fire of 
civil war should desolate our homes, and cause 
the 'shuddering mother to hug her babe more 
closely to her bosom,' so that they could only 
remain masters of the burnt and blackened 
field." How false, and infamously slanderous 
this is, I leave you, gentlemen of the Commis- 
sion, to decide. 

I note the following special instances of 
misstatements of evidence by the counsel for 
Mr. Milligan : 

Mr. Cofi'roth states that Mr. Ibach testified 
that a resolution was introduced at the Grand 
Council of June, 1864, "pledging the order to 
resistance tothe^draft, and that it was promptly 
and with great unanimity voted down ; and 
that the belligerent gentleman who introduced 
the resolution, went away very much dissatis- 
fied with the order." There is no such testi- 
mony, but simply that the resolution was vo- 
ted down. 
He states: 

"And yet Carrington paid and encouraged 
Stidger to extend, as rapidly as possible, an 
organization that is claimed to be treasona- 
ble." No witness testified to such a statement. 
He asserts: 

"But the evidence further shows that both 
the defendant, Horsey, and the Government 
witness, Connell, denied and repudiated the 
declarations of John W. Stone." The evidence 
does not substantiate this assertion. 

Again he states that Mr. Bingham "never 
knew of any other than its political charac- 
ter, until the revelation by Dodd of his 'in- 
sane and hellish proposition.' " 

Mr. Bingham, on the contrary, testifies that 
"the first idea I had of its being a military 
organization" was in hearing Major Conk- 
lin's speech at the Grand Council of Feb. 16th 
and 17th, 1864. 

On the same page he asserts: 
"The evidence of Stidger, their detective and 
witness, shows that while under the pay and 
direction of Carrington, and with his consent 
and approbation, he extended the order, and 
perfected arrangements to inaugurate civil 
war; and all this for the sole purpose of in- 
fluencing the then pending elections." 

Stidger did not so testify. Nothing from 
which such an inference could have been justly 
drawn. 

On page 10th, he states that Bingham 
"quenched the flame that the authorities were 
fanning. While they were nursing, he \vas 
stifling." The evidence contradicts that as- 
sertion. 

Again he says: 

Long after "the organization of the Grand 
Council at Terre Haute, that what was termed 
'the military bill,' or military feature of the 



order, was gotten up." The evidence shows 
that the Terre Haute meeting was held Aug. 
27th, 1863, and the military bill was introduced 
and adopted Sept. 10th, 1863. 

He states that "Dodd's scheme required 
'Bingham's' consent as a condition prece- 
dent;" and without which, "it otherwise could 
not receive its initiatory impulse." The evi- 
dence shows that Dodd desired Bingham's co- 
operation; but it also proves that when that 
co-operation was withheld, Dodd and Walker 
and their co-conspirators, did not abandon 
their schemes. 

Finally, he states that Harrison testifies 
"that Dodd instructed him, when he sent him 
to notify Mr. Milligan to attend this council 
of the leading men of the order, not to inform 
Milligan of the nature of the business." Mr. 
Harrison makes no such statement in his tes- 
timony. 

One more quotation, and I have done with 
this argument. I said that this argument 
looked to me as though it had emanated from 
the disloyal heart of Mr. Milligan himself; 
that it contains his bitterness and venom 
toward all persons connected with the Govern- 
ment, and toward all the institutions of our 
country. He carries that venom to the ex- 
treme of hatred to the people of this nation 
when exercising the elective franchise. This 
argument says: "But it is not to be expected 
that gentlemen of the age, firmness, honesty 
and intelligence of Mr. Milligan, can change 
their honest convictions upon political ques- 
tions to suit the views of the AdministTation 
brought into power perhaps by a mere, change- 
ling mob." 

This is the culmination of his hatred of our 
free institutions. AVhen the people in their 
might assert that great, God-given right of 
determining by whom they shall be governed, 
and reiterate the sentiment that just govern- 
ments are instituted for the benefit of the gov- 
erned, he calls them, when acting in this noble 
capacity, a "changeling mob!" 

In considering the Ritual and obligations of 
this order, I have substantially answered the 
arguments of the counsel for Mr. Humphreys 
and Dr. Bowles upon those points, and there- 
fore do not refer to them specially. 

GENERAL PURPOSES OF THE ORPER. 

I come now to the consideration of the gen- 
eral intents and purposes of the order, ag 
shown by the evidence: or, in other words, to 
the consideration of what the evidence shows 
was the manner or means by which the mem- 
bers of the order proposed to carry out the 
purposes enunciated in the Ritual, and to the 
execution of which they bound themselves by 
an appeal to Almighty God. The foundation 
stones of this disloyal structure were: First, 
that the States were sovereign and independ- 
ent governments; and that each State, in its 
sovereign capacity, had a right to secede. 
That whenever the Government de facto, or any 
department of the Government exercised un- 
delegated powers, it was a usurpation ; and 
that the usurped Government was to be re- 
moved by force of arms; and they bound 
themselves together by oaths to overturn this 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



273 



Government, which they declared was exercis- 
ing undelegated and usurped powers. They 
bound themselves, also, to "assist any people 
or peoples" who may be waging war in "en- 
deavoring to establish, or have inaugurated, a 
government for themselves, and to resist any 
coercing power," whether it shall arise within 
or come from without the Government. These, 
then, were the common purposes of the con- 
spiracy, and its ultimate design. How, or by 
what means these purposes, these designs, 
were to be carried into execution, was to de- 
pend, and must have depended upon the tenor 
of events, upon certain contingencies of time, 
place and manner. All these were to be de- 
termined upon by the leaders, when a certain 
set of circumstances should come to pass. In 
the minds of these leaders it was a question 
of the time when success would be the most 
certain. 

Then, in the original purpose or purposes of 
the conspiracy, all were conspirators who 
joined that organization, who heai'd that Rit- 
ual read, and took that obligation. They 
united and became one body for the purpose 
' of carrying out these illegal, disloyal and 
treasonable purposes. I might stop without 
introducing one particle of evidence as to the 
means by which they intended to execute 
these purposes, and rest the case with perfect 
confidence after I had once proven the nature 
of this order, that it is disloyal in its incep- 
tion and in its birth, and that the accused 
were members of the organization. 

"A conspiring together of two or more per- 
sons is sufficiently an act, without any step 
taken in pursuance of the conspiracy." Bish- 
op^* Criminal Law^ Par. 313. Commonwealth vs. 
Judd, 2 3Iass., 329, 337; Commoniuealth vs. Tib- 
betls, 2 Mass., 536, 538; Commonwealth vs. War- 
ren, 6 Mass., 74. People vs. Mather, 4 Wend., 
229; Commonwealth VB. McKisson, 8 S. ^* R., 420. 

Bishop, Criminal Law, Vol. 2, Par. 165, says: 
"Therefore, in conspiracy, the thing intended 
need not be accomplished; but the bare com- 
bination constitutes the crime." Bishop cites 
in support of this principle numerous author- 
ities. 

No further proof was necessary to warrant 
this Court in finding every one of the accused 
guilty under the charges of conspiracy, af- 
fording aid and comfort to rebels, inciting in- 
surrection, disloyal practices, and violation of 
the laws of war. Whether that proof has 
been clear and conclusive, or not, is for you, 
gentlemen of the Commission, and not for 
myself, to determine. I have, however, gone 
forward, and attempted to bring before this 
Court the whole truth, to show you how far 
these parties acted toward the consummation 
of the common purpose. That proof most 
clearly demonstrates that the "common de- 
sign" of the order was to reorganize the 
Government on the same principles which 
were the foundation of the present rebellion, 
and are the cardinal principles of the Confed- 
erate Government. The rebels claim that they 
had a right to dissolve their connection with 
the old Government. The order conceded that 
right, and pledged itself to assist, by force of 
arms, any people found waging war for that 
18 



right. The order denominates the attempt on 
the part of the Government to coerce these 
people into submission, as an act of tyranny 
and usurpation; claiming that the Govern- 
ment had no right, by force of arms, to coerce 
a seceding State. The proof of this point is 
clear and conclusive. They pledged the or- 
der, and obligated themselves, to resist this 
coercion. The order was political in its char- 
acter only so far as it was intended, and did 
attempt, to educate the masses of the Demo- 
cratic party up to this belief. In this attempt, 
I am glad to say that it signally failed, and 
I here enter upon this record, and say it to 
meet the charge made by Mr. Milligan in this 
Court that this is a political prosecution. The 
proof has shown that the masses of the Demo- 
cratic party are loyal and true to their Gov- 
ernment, true to the integrity of the Govern- 
ment, and her institutions. 

This order, however, in and of itself, was 
political, if secession, insurrection, disloyal 
purposes and treason make it political. It 
did aim to educate the Democratic party up to 
the disloyal stand-point which it had taken, 
that it might secure through the ballot-box, 
by putting its chiefs and leaders in power, the 
same ends which the Confederacy wei-e fight- 
ing to achieve. Failing in this, the order pro- 
posed and was pledged to use force of arms to 
secure these ends. The resort to force was 
kept constantly in view; and with relation to 
this, the order was organized, and made mili- 
tary in its character. The details of its mili- 
tary organization were confined to the Grand 
Council, to a great extent, perhaps, as they 
were regulated by laws passed at the Grand 
Council. 

The question, then, for the Court to deter- 
mine, is not so much whether these military 
details were known to the rank and file of the 
order, as they were to the members of the 
Grand Council, of which all the accused have 
been proven to be members; and further, it ia 
not so material whether the details, and man- 
ner, and means by which the purposes of this 
order were to be carried out, were known to 
the rank and file of the order, as whether 
these means, these details, were devised to 
carry out the common purposes to which the 
organization, as a body, had originally pledged 
its members. Just so far as these cardinal 
principles of the order, which are embodied in 
the rituals and obligations, warranted the 
leaders to go in carrying these purposes into 
execution, just to that extent, the rank and 
file, including all the members of the organi- 
zation, were bound by and responsible for 
their acts. 

Roscoe, in his Criminal Evidence, says : 

"In prosecutions for conspiracies, it is an 
established rule, that where several persons 
are proved to have combined together for the 
same illegal purpose, any act done by one of 
the party in pursuance of the original con- 
certed plan, and with reference to the common 
object, is, in the contemplation of law as well 
as in sound reason, the act of the whjole party; 
and, therefore, the proof of the act will be ev- 
idence against any of the others who were 
engaged in the same general conspiracy, with- 



274 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



out regard to tlie question, whether the pris- 
oner is proved to have been concerned in 
the particular transaction." Phill. Ev., 210, 
Bth ed. 

The oath taken by the members of this or- 
der, bound them to obedience to their supe- 
riors as complete and prompt as that of sol- 
diers in the army, or of an inferior to his 
superior officer. That oath, after the member 
had assented to the principles enunciated in 
the rituals, pledged the common members be- 
fore hand to become particeps criniinis to what- 
ever insurrectionary purposes, plans, or acts 
their superior officers might design or execute. 
As I before said, they became parties to the 
common conspiracy, the details of which for 
prudential reasons were confined to the 
leaders. Then let us see how far the co-opera- 
tion in this conspiracy moved forward to the 
consummation of their purposes. 

Harrison testifies that on the 10th of Sep- 
tember, 1863, when the Military Bill was 
adopted, it was stated in open council, "that 
it was necessary to organize in a military ca- 
pacity, to protect the rights of the members 
against the encroachments of the Administra- 
tion." In other words, to prepare to set aside 
this Government, which was using usurped 
powers. In his cross-examination, he testi- 
fies that the same military feature existed in 
both the American Knights and the Sons of 
Liberty. Also, that the military bill was intro- 
duced "in pursuance of injunctions received 
from Mr. Wright, the originator of the organ- 
ization in this State. * * His instructions 
were that the order must have a certain num- 
ber of major-generals." Thus we see, that 
the ultimate resort to arms, to force, was one 
of the original, fundamental principles of 
the order. 

Bingham testifies that M. C. Kerr, when he 
came to this city to see about Dodd's scheme of 
revolution, and to assist in having it stopped, 
said that 

"The people of Washington, Harrison and 
Floyd counties have got the idea that a revo- 
lution was impending." 

Thus it will be seen that this idea of revo- 
lution, of resort to arms to set aside the Gov- 
ernment, not only permeated the order itself 
but entire neighborhoods. Its pur^ ecs were 
80 generally, so universally known, tnat peo- 
ple who lived in the sections where this 
knowledge became prevalent, sold their crops 
and their personal property that they might 
gave it from the general destruction which, 
they expected, would follow the contemplated 
insurrection. 

Stidger testifies that on the 6th of May, 
18G4, "Mr. HeflFren told me during the evening 
that he could call together, within twenty-four 
hours, from 1,000 to 1,500 armed men in that 
section in connection with that secret organ- 
ization." Tliis statement stands unimpeached 
and uncontradicted, Heffren only saying that 
he does not recollect the conversation, and 
that it might have taken place. 

Stidger saw Bowles on the 9th of May, 
1864, when Bowles told him that he was a 
'military chief of the order;" and spoke of 
the co-operation of the forces of the order in 



Illinois, Indiana, Missouri and Kentucky with 
the rebel commands of Price and Buckner. 

Here we see that Dr. Bowles, who occupied 
the same position in the order that Milligan 
and Humphreys did, had knowledge of these 
intents and purposes of the order, and de- 
clared them to any member of the order who 
chose to inquire. He had no better means of 
information, no higher trust than the other 
major-generals — in fact, he did not receive 
his appointment until several months after 
Milligan and Humphreys were appointed. 
They must have had the same knowledge. 

From this time foi'ward, Stidger testifies to 
details of military plans, purposes and infor- 
mation, given to him by Bowles and others. 
He also states that in Kentucky, where the or- 
der was organized by and through the officers 
in this State, members " were always in- 
structed regarding the military character of 
the order." He says that they were instructed 
"by Judge Bullitt, Dr. Kalfus, or myself, or 
whoever initiated them, that the order was for 
the purpose of resisting the Government by 
force of arms, and for assisting the South." 

HeflFren makes a distinction between the 
civil and military parts of the order. This, 
however, is simply a matter of opinion, and 
is of no importance one way or the other, so 
long as it is proven that the order had a mili- 
tary branch, and that the military branch 
was necessary to the accomplishment of the 
purposes avowed in the fundamental princi- 
ples of the order. 

Heffren, however, in his testimony, does not 
say that those to whom arms were to be given 
belonged solely to the military portion of the 
order. On the contrary, he says, arming was 
not confined to the military portion of the 
order. The military part of the order, he 
says, "had for its object the separating of the 
States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri 
and Kentucky from the Eastern States, and 
make a North-western Confederacy ; and, 
failing in that, join our fortunes with the 
South." In pursuance of that object, "that 
there was half a million dollars sent to Indi 
ana, Illinois, and Kentucky, I think by rebel 
agents in Canada, for the purpose of procur 
ing arms and ammunition for these North- 
western States to arm themselves with." 

"The arms thus bought were to be used to 
carry out the plans of the military part of 
the order by arming the order." p. 412. 

These military objects were discussed in 
Grand Council, by members, without reference 
to their military position. The discussion in 
the September Council was in open meeting 
of the order; and the nominations were first 
made by the delegations from the several mili- 
tary districts. In February, Mr. Heffren says, 
"The matter (the military objects of the or- 
der) was talked of by some of us; perhaps 
a few of us in a corner, or off to one side." 

Even in September, 1864, when the major- 
generals were appealed to by Heffren to know 
whether "we," by which word he said, "I 
mean the members of the Order of American 
Knights," should submit to Dodd's arrest or 
fight, it is evident the whole order was 
expected to co-operate, and that, too, under 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



275 



the direction of Uie military officers elected 
by the civil organization of the order. In 
the A'estibule degree, there is no purpose ap- 
parent but a political one; but the moment 
the oath of the first degree proper is adminis- 
tered, the civil and militarj' parts of the or- 
der become blended — one faith, one ritual, one 
oath, one act, and one Supreme head charac- 
lerizing the unity of the order. 

Wilson said Dodd was to be considered the 
military head of the order in this Stale; and 
that the revolution in this State " was to take 
place by the order of Mr. Dodd; he was to 
send out couriers to the different commanders 
of the several districts of the State — the ma- 
jor-generals of the four districts into which 
the State was divided — and they were to send 
out couriers into the respective counties com- 
posing their several districts; they were to 
give notice of the uprising in their counties; 
and then it was expected again that informa- 
tion would be conveyed to certain persons in 
the couuty that had been prominent and lead- 
ing men in the organization, and they were to 
see that it was conveyed to the different town- 
ships in the county.'' 

Wilson also adds that Dodd's plan was 
"known to all the members of the order in 
my county." With how much plausibility or 
reason can it be claimed or argued, that these 
intents and purposes were unknown to three 
of the military chieftains of this organiza- 
tion, and yet were known to the entire or- 
ganization in a county in which the society 
was fully organized in every township but 
three. 

The defense have attacked with great bitter- 
ness the character of Mr. Heffren. They have 
been unable to say one word as against Dr. Wil- 
son, except that he was an informer. Of Mr. 
Heffren, I can only say this : In the past his- 
tory of this State he has been a man of prom- 
inence, and a leading member of the Demo- 
cratic party, and associated as a political co- 
worker with each of these defendants. For 
four years he was a member of the Senate of 
this State, and was the Democratic candidate 
for Speaker in the House of Representatives 
at the session of 1861. 

He has held a commission as Lieutenant 
Colonel in our army, which he resigned. The 
only act of his life that I know of or have 
heard of against him is, that he became embit- 
tered against the Government of the United 
States, and joined this disloyal and treason- 
able organization. The accused have been 
unable to disprove any thing which was ut- 
tered upon this stand by him. They had 
made no attempt to impeach him. Nor have 
they attempted in any manner to disprove 
one of the utterances of Dr. Wilson, a man 
whom every one characterizes as a person of 
undoubted probity and truthfulness. He now 
holds the position of Auditor of his county, 
and has the confidence of the community in 
which he lives. His evidence, not having 
been refuted in the slightest particular, and 
in no respect being improbable, and no im- 
peachment having been attempted, must be 
given full credit and effect by this Court. 
The witnesses introduced by the defense 



show that the order was not purely political, 
although they testified with great unanimity 
that it was designed as an offset to the Union 
League, as they had heard. But on that 
point the witnesses stultified themselves by 
stating that such members as Mr. Milligau 
; had opposed the extension of the order. Why 
1 oppose its extension, if it be only designed as 
la political organization to offset the Union 
I League? Mr. Ibach testifies that the order 
I was political for the purpose of advancing 
I Democratic principles, "as we understood 
them." He also states that at the June Coun- 
cil, "A young man from the north part of the 
Stat* wa-s very uneasy about tho draft, and 
thought the order should do something." He 
thought "we ought to combine." A resolution 
was offered and voted down, "That the differ- 
ent temples in the counties should organize 
for the purpose of resisting the Government. 
* * * It created quite a turbulent time 
there. Some thought that the order was purely 
political, and others that there was a military 
branch to it. The majority of the members 
did not want any military action, but pre- 
ferred to wait for a change through the elec- 
tions." In other words, the dissension was 
not on the right and duty of resisting the 
Government, but simply a question of time, 
means and policy. The relations of the order 
to the Government came up again, as Mr. 
Ibach testifies : "They had quite a discussion 
about the grievances of the Government, but 
could not come to an understanding about the 
matter." 

The same witness, who has been so often re- 
ferred to by the counsel for Mr. Milligan, had 
a muster-roll of a company headed by his 
own name, which was drawn up within the 
past eighteen months, whose object was to get 
State arms, if possible, and to drill — not for 
State or Government service — but, to use his 
words, to "protect ourselves * * * against 
the soldiers that were coming home; * * to 
guard ourselves against what we called en- 
croachments on our rights." 

Judge Wilson B. Loughridge, who has been 
so often quoted by the defense, another of Mr. 
Milligan's witnesses, testifies that "it was al- 
together a political association: " that "it was 
intended to protect the members of the Demo- 
cratic party against violence, which it was 
thought had been used against them in par- 
ticular quarters ; and, in short, to protect 
the members of the Democratic party, and 
see that their rights were never trampled 
upon." 

Again he said: "The functions of the or- 
ganization, as I understood it, were to see that 
we had a fair election, and maintained our 
rights. * * To defend ourselves; if we 
were assailed, to protect ourselves." To do 
this, "with just such means as were neces- 
sary to afford us protection; to exhaust all 
peaceable means, and if these failed, to exer- 
cise the right of self-defense." That "we 
were to be protected wherever we were as- 
sailed. * * The efforts of the members 
were to be mutual in protecting each other." 
Thu? it will be seen that the design and pur- 
poses of the order were mutual, and were not 



276 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS 



to be confined to peaceable means, but looked 
to a final resort to arms. 

The same witness identified the tenth section 
of the Declaration of Principles, read to the 
candidate for the first degree, as "one of the 
cardinal principles of the order." He also 
said he had " never heard members dissent 
from it;" and that in his paper, and in his 
speeches, he had expressed the opinion that 
"the President was assuming powers not del- 
egated;" and that "the order held to that as 
well." Take this admission in connection 
with the reading of the tenth section, and out 
of their own mouths they are convicted of 
unlawful combination to achieve treasonable 
purposes. 

Stephen G. Burton, a witness for Mr. 
Humphreys, in his direct examination, testi- 
fied that the order was political, and "there 
was nothing more taught in the second or 
third degree than in the first." In the cross- 
examination, I read to the witness the tenth 
section of the Declaration of Principles of 
the first degree, and asked what those sen- 
tences meant. He promptly answered: 

"They have reference to counter-revolu- 
tion. * * Because when one political party 
assumes power, and begins to trample on the 
rights of other citizens, these can take their 
rights in their own hands, and defend them 
by force of arms. My idea is that it is right 
for a free American citizen to defend his rights 
by force when they are trampled upon." I 
further asked: "Was it one of the purposes 
of the order, that in case of these encroach- 
ments referred to, and the trampling upon 
their rights, that this order should resist it by 
force of arms?" 

He answered : " Yes, sir." 

Thus I need no explanation of the intents 
and purposes of this order, or its illegal and 
treasonable designs, by the witnesses for the 
Government. The defense themselves have 
made that proof for me. In examining this 
proof it must be kept in mind what they claim 
were encroachments, usurpations, and tramp- 
ling upon their rights or the rights of any people, 
and in case they deemed them to exist, how, 
from their stand-point, they proposed to act. 

The examination of this witness continued : 

"Q. The ritual claims the right of resistance 
'whenever the officials assume and exercise 
power not delegated.' Has not the order 
claimed that the Government was exercising 
power not delegated? Have you not so 
claimed ? 

"A. I have frequently claimed that it had 
assumed powers not delegated. 

"Q. Has not the order also claimed this? 

"A. I suppose it has. 

"Q. Was not this one of its principles? 

"A. I suppose it was. The Government had 
assumed too much power. 

" Q. In case of such assumption of power, 
was the remedy contained in these words: 
'It is the inherent right and imperative duty 
of the people to resist such officials, and, if 
need be, expel them by force of arms?' 

"Q. Was that ♦he remedy proposed by the 
order? 

«'A. Yes, sir." 



Here, gentlemen, is the explanation given 
by their own witnesses of their own under- 
standing of this combination which they had 
entered into. This obligation, which they had 
taken upon themselves, defines whether the 
purposes of the combination were legal or il- 
legal. 

Let us glance for a moment at a few of the 
overt acts of treason enacted in pursuance of 
the general purposes of the order. First, as to 
the drilling and arming of the order. 

Teny testifies that, in Martin county, the 
order "drilled a few times in the township," 
and "that they were getting arms all the time." 

In speaking of the order, I do so without ref- 
erence to whether it went under the name of 
the Knights of the Golden Circle, American 
Knights or Sons of Liberty: for I think I 
have sufficiently shown that one was but the 
outgrowth of the other, and that they were all 
one and the same general conspiracy, actu- 
ated by the same motives, and moving for- 
ward to the consummation of the same pur- 
poses, and as a general rule containing the 
same members. 

Connell and HeflFren both testify as to Horsey's 
having brought ammunition to his own home 
in Martin county, and HefFren as to its being 
concealed upon Horsey's premises. 

Robertson testifies to the arming and drill- 
ing of the order in Randolph county, of its 
purpose to resist the draft and arbitrary ar- 
rests, whenever the emergency arose, or the 
heads of the order demanded it. He details 
the military organization of their lodge. 

The order in Washington county was gen- 
erally armed, and $1,000 was placed at the 
disposal of the order in that county, in June 
last, by Dr. Bowles, for the purpose of pur- 
chasing arms for those unable to arm them- 
selves, as Hefifren and Wilson both testify. 
This was a month nearly before the Confeder- 
acy tendered to the order, at the Chicago con- 
clave, $2,000,000 for revolutionary purposes. 

In regard to arming the order in this place, 
Harrison testifies to the arrival of arms, pis- 
tols and fixed ammunition, consigned by 
AValker to J. J. Parsons, a member of the or- 
der, and concealed in Dodd's building — which 
were purchased shortly after the Chicago con- 
clave. Colonel A. J. Warner also testifies to 
the seizure of these arms. 

Stidger testifies that "Bowles made a state- 
ment in the Council of the 14th of June, that 
the organization in his county numbered 
about GOO men; but that there was a military 
organization amounting to 900 men, armed 
and equipped. * * He also stated that he 
had an arrangement with a man to furnish 
any number or kind of arms." Also, that in 
August, Bowles wanted to get arms of Peters, 
of Cincinnati, and B. C. Kent, of New Al- 
bany; and asked Stidger to have "three or 
four thousand lances made." 

Stidger also says: "I was told by Mr. 
Kern, a member of the order, that Judge Wil- 
liams, of Kentucky, had given §100, and other 
members $200 more for organizing the order, 
and that he had expended that money in the 
purchase of arms, and that they had sent the 
1 men, with the arms, South." 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



277 



Greek fire was one of the appliances of the 
order, to be used to destroy Government prop- 
erty, as Stidger, Wilson and Heflfreu testify, 
and had been used for that purpose. It is true 
Booking attempts to explain and refute some 
of the evidence of these witnesses; but his 
story, in and of itself, is so contradictory, im- 
probable and entirely contemptible, that the 
defense themselves have hardly dared to claim 
any weight for it. The whole eifect of his tes- 
timony upon the minds of the members of this 
Commission, must have been to corroborate 
Stidger and the statements of the Government 
witnesses. lie admits the receipt of the $200 00. 
He admits that he was present at the meeting 
of members of the order at the Louisville Ho- 
tel, in Louisville, which was referred to by 
Stidger. Mr. Booking stated that he was 
very much out of health, and went to the 
Springs, where Dr. Bowles resided, for his 
health — to recuperate his decaying vital pow- 
ers — and as the result of this stay, took din- 
ner at these Springs, and left after a long in- 
terview with Bowles; and that being entirely 
out of money, and hard up, he went to the 
Louisville Hotel, at Louisville. Yet he says he 
had no business whatever to call him there, 
nor any thing whatever to do; and that while 
there, he made and explained to these gentle- 
men at that Hotel, all about his shells, hand- 
grenades and Greek fire; and that still being 
hard up, though having received $200 00, he 
travels to Indianapolis and spends a week, 
then goes to Detroit and spends a week, thence 
to Cincinnati, from Cincinnati to Adams coun- 
ty, Ohio, from Adams county to Cincinnati, 
and from Cincinnati to this city, where he has 
remained ever since. Concealing the fact that 
he was at Windsor, Canada, until it is unwil- 
lingly drawn from him, he admits that on this 
trip, in April or May, he stopped for two weeks 
at the house of the rebel Colonel Steele, in 
Windsor, Canada, free of charge, without busi- 
ness or employment, or design of any kind, as 
he swears, in going there. All this is suffi- 
cient to give this Commission an understand- 
ing of the motives, and bias and weight to be 
given to Booking's testimony. 

OPPOSITION TO THE DRAFT. 

This order was pledged, as a body, not to 
serve in our army. They were sworn not to 
enter the service of the Government for pay. 
(See Obligation of the Second Degree.) Its 
members were even taught that the prosecu- 
tion of the war was a usurpation of power. 
Its teachings, as a natural result, led to oppo- 
sition to the draft. In Wells county, its mem- 
bers, in their temple, discussed opposition to 
the draft. Joseph Johnson, a witness for the 
defense, says: "Some said, I will resist; some 
said, I will fight, or run off, or do something 
else." The temple in Rock Creek township, 
Wells county, sent committees to other places, 
to learn what the order should do about the 
draft. Milligan counseled resistance, but oth- 
ersof theorderthoughtthat impolitic. Zumro 
and Johnson both testified that they had a 
military organization in their temple. A fla- 
grant appeal to the people to resist the draft 
and to discourage enlistment, is the speech of 



Mr. Milligan at the gathering of the order, 
and others, at Fort Wayne, on the 1-lth of Au- 
gust, 1863. It is a matter of public history 
that this Convention denounced the draft as 
the most damnable of all the outrages perpe- 
trated by this Administration. Yet so far from 
denouncing that resolution and others of kin- 
dred disloyalty, Mr. Milligan went into an 
elaborate defense of the South, denouncing 
the Government, and the war, and the purpose 
for which it was waged. 

COMMUNICATION WITH REBELS. 

I come now to consider next the acts of this 
order, as a body, as to their communication and 
concert of action with the rebels. 

Stidger testifies that he was taken for a 
rebel commissioner, when he first visited Sa- 
lem. HefFren corroborates this statement, 
saying: "It is possible some man played him- 
self off on Stidger, at that time, for me. A 
great many men about Salem, at that time, 
were expecting a man from Cumberland Gap, 
to report rebel movements." 

Bowles stated, in the presence of Stidger, 
"that they had sent a man named Dickerson 
to Richmond, to have the Confederate author- 
ities send an invading force to act in concert 
with their order." 

Stidger says, that "Bullitt instructed a man 
to try and get a place appointed for him to 
meet Colonel Jesse, said to be a rebel colonel in 
command of the rebel forces in Kentucky; and 
he instructed this man to go to Colonel Syph- 
ert, a rebel colonel, said to be in command of 
a rebel squad, and have a conference with him 
about the capture of Louisville." He also 
states, that in Kentucky, "there was a rebel 
Col. Anderson, of the 3d rebel Kentucky Regi- 
ment of infantry, initiated into the order about 
the last of June, 1864," by Kalfus; and, also, 
Captain Van Morgan, Dick Pratt, Jim McCrock- 
lin, and a captain of a squad of guerrillas. 

And here let me say, that all that has been 
said by Mr. Milligan's counsel, or by Mr. Ray 
in reference to Mr. Stidger's initiating, or as- 
sisting in the initiation of those parties, seems 
to be exceedingly unjust and ill-timed. It 
certainly can have no weight with this Court, 
or with any unbiased mind. Mr. Stidger un- 
equivocally states that all he did in the way 
of initiation of rebel officers, or of any one 
else, he did in pursuance of instructions from 
Judge Bullitt, the head of the order in Ken- 
tucky, or Dr. Kalfus, or upon his own respon- 
sibility. He does not state, and there is not 
one particle of eTJJence from the beginning 
of this trial to it* close, to support the allega- 
tion, that he e\«r initiated any person into 
this order, by tiie instruction, direction or 
sanction of General Carrington, or any other 
officer of the United States, or of the State of 
Indiana. He was instructed simply to become 
a member of this order, and learn all he could 
with reference to its ads and purposes. It is 
perfectly absurd to claim that there was any 
desire or design on his part, or on the part of 
the authorities, to extend or perpetuate thia 
order. All his acts were, weekly and month- 
ly, reported to the United States authorities. 
They were striving to obtain that degree cf 



278 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



infoimation upon which they could act in 
bringing these conspirators to justice; and 
the moment they gathered sufficient informa- 
tion to base their action upon, the authorities 
acted. And you, gentlemen, on the part of 
the accused, at cue moment and in one breath, 
are bitter beyond degree, in denouncing the 
authorities because they did not act sooner; 
and with the same vigor, and in the next 
breath, you denounce their arrest, finally, as 
acts of tyranny, unwarranted and unauthor- 
ized. 

To return to the evidence. Mr. Heffren tes- 
tifies, that the revolution on the 16th of Aug- 
ust hinged on the contingency of the co-ope- 
ration of the rebels; and that "about the 16th 
of August, Dr. Bowles had sent a man to Gen- 
eral Price, but he had not returned." Rebel com- 
munication was also spoken of to Hefifren, by 
Mr. Harris, of Salem. Wilson says, that at 
the Chicago meeting of July 20th, 1864, he 
heard communication with the rebels spoken 
of. He says: "I think Dr. Bowles said, mes- 
eengers were sent to the rebels. ••■ •■■ I think 
they were sent into Kentucky and Missouri. 
* * I inferred it [communication] was to be 
with Price and Buckner, because they were to 
be the co-ojiorative forces in case of an upris- 
ing." "The general signal for the uprising was 
to be the appearance of guerrillas or troops in 
the vicinity of St. Louis or Louisville." The 
couriers sent, "were to go to Generals Price 
and Buckner. ' The Illinois forces of the or- 
der were to liberate rebel prisoners in that 
State, and concentrate at St. Louis, "to co-op- 
erate with Price's forces." 

Wilson also states that at the Chicago meet- 
ing, Dodd represented that he came fresh 
from a conference with Holcombe, Clay and 
Sanders, at Niagara Falls, who were duly au- 
thorized by the Southern Confederacy to meet 
them in Chicago, but could not get a safe con- 
duct, through Horace Greeley, from the Presi- 
dent. Yet the Southern Confederacy was rep- 
resented by a Captain Majors, and Mr. Bar- 
rett, who said he was authorized to represent 
the Southern Confederacy. 

These men met, according to their own 
statement, not to destroy the Government, but 
to save it; and in this work of saving the 
Government, they boasted of the active sym- 
pathy and co-operation of the rebel authori- 
ties, who have always maintained the distinct- 
ive principles of the order. 

Mr. Barrett, of Missouri, in opening the 
conclave, stated "that his object in calling 
the meeting was that he thouglit the Govern- 
ment could be restored, and he was satisfied 
it could be, if we could get the co-operation 
of the North with the South — or a portion of 
the North, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, 
and Kentucky; he said if the members of the 
Sons of Liberty in these States, would co-op- 
erate with the South, he had no doubt the en- 
tire Government could be saved through their 
action. He also said that it had been contem- 
plated to have an uprising at some time soon, 
perhaps as early as the 3d of August, but 
that had failed from some cause; and he 
thought every thing could be got ready for an 
uprising, perhaps by the 10th or 15th of the 



month, and that the South, in order to shoir 
her willingness to engage in some movement 
that would restore the Government, had au- 
thorized him to place at the disposal of the 
members of the organization a large sum of 
money, amounting to two millions of dollars. 
■■•• That the organization could have the 

use of that amount of money in preparing 
themselves to rise against the Lincoln Admin- 
istration ; that it would be distributed to the 
several Grand Commanders of those States, 
and by them sub-distributed among such per- 
sons inside of their order as in their judgment 
was prudent, and to be expended, by those 
who received it, for arms and other appli- 
ances of war. 

"He [Barrett] stated, in speaking of the 
money, that it had been used for the purpose 
of paying for the destruction of United States 
property, arsenals, burning boats," etc. "He 
said they would pay ten per cent, on Govern- 
ment property so destroyed." 

Dr. Wilson said he understood from some 
source, he thinks from Dr. Bowles, " that Ohio 
was to be taken care of by Vallandigham * 
* in the event of a general uprising. He 
had some forces at his disposal in Canada, 
and would bring those forces into Ohio to co- 
operate with other forces at Cincinnati and 
Louisville." 

HOW IT WAS TO BE DONE. 

I come next to the consideration of the rev- 
olutionary plot, or the plan finally determined 
upon, by which the purposes of this or.*er 
were to be carried into execution. The details 
of the plan of operations matured at Chicago, 
in July, 1864, involving the release of the 
rebel prisoners in Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, 
and the seizure of Government arsenals, and 
burning of Northern cities, etc., in this State, 
in Missouri, and Kentucky, were detailed sub- 
stantially alike by Harrison, Stidger, Bing- 
ham, Wilson and Hefi"ren. Harrison first 
speaks of it as "a design in progress or in 
contemplation." Dodd desired to have a Dem- 
ocratic mass meeting called, under cover of 
which he would carry out his plans. If the 
meeting was called, Harrison says, "he in- 
tended to send out circulars to "the members 
of the order in the various counties, ordering 
the members (not the military members, it 
should be borne in mind, but all the members) 
to come up to that meeting armed." * * "By 
the aid of the rebel prisoners, who were to be 
released through his instrumentality, and that 
of the persons who came in here to the meet- 
ing to be held here on the 16th, they were to 
have an uprising and overturn the State Gov- 
ernment." 

"This scheme had its connection not only 
in this State, but in the State of Illinois." 
Harrison also stated that Dodd was the proper 
person to head the uprising. I then asked 
him: 

"Q. Had he the power in an official capac- 
ity to order that here? 

"A. It was vested entirely in Mr. Dodd. 

"Q. Had he the power to order members of 
the order at will? 

"A. He had." 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



279 



Joseph J. Bingham, in his testimony, states 
that when Dodd approached him, and asked 
him for his co-operation in this scheme of rev- 
olution, August 2d, he (Dodd) said "that at 
the Council, a revolution had been determined 
upon. * * Arrangements had been made 
to release the prisoners on Johnsons Island, 
at Camp Chase, near Columbus, Ohio, at Camp 
Morton, and also at Camp Douglas, and that 
the prisoners at Camp Douglas, after their re- 
lease, were to go over and release those at 
Rock Island. At the same time there was to 
be an uprising at Louisville, at which the Gov- 
ernment stores, etc., were to be seized." 

This scheme Bingham did not indorse, but 
did conceal. He did go to Athon and Ristine, 
us he testifies, and asked them leading ques- 
tions, and learned nothing, and revealed noth- 
ing. Through the instrumentality of Mr. 
Kerr, who seemed alone faithful to his country 
among the faithless, a conference of leading 
Democrats was held to arraign Dodd and 
AValker. They met at McDonalds offifte. Bing- 
ham says: "Colonel Walker and Dodd did not 
acknowledge or deny, at that interview, that 
anj' such scheme was entertained. They both 
spoke, and very earnestly, about the state of 
public aflFairs, and they used about these argu- 
ments: 'That the Government could not be re- 
stored again under the old state of things, 
without a forcible revolution. That an appeal 
to the ballot-box was all folly; that the people 
were prepared for revolution; that they would 
not submit to the draft; and that it was bet- 
ter to direct the revolution, than to have the 
revolution direct us.^" 

Every member of that meeting, who heard 
these speeches uttered by these men, was 
bound, if he acted in good faith to his country, 
to have had these men instantly arrested and 
turned- over to the authorities to be punished. 
And every man who was present on that oc- 
casion, failed in his duty to his Government 
in her hour of sorest need, when he permitted 
these men to walk abroad maturing their 
schemes of revolution, of insurrection and 
treason, or permitted in his hearing the utter- 
ances of these sentiments, knowing that they 
had already matured a scheme for carrying 
them into execution. 

In these brief speeches of AValker and 
Dodd, as given by Bingham, is outlined the 
legitimate culmination of the cardinal prin- 
ciples of the order. The order had never 
doubted the propriety of insurrection and 
revolution, but only whether the proper time 
had come for its inauguration. Walker and 
Dodd believed that period had arrived, and 
they acted accordingly. They accepted Bar- 
rett's offer of rebel co-operation. They coun- 
seled with Holcombe, Clay and Sanders, at Niag- 
ara Falls, while maturing and arranging the 
details of revolution. They admitted into their 
Chicago conclave of July 20th, representatives 
of the Southern Confederacy. They appointed 
a meeting with rebel officers in this city, to 
arrange the details of releasing rebel pris- 
oners. 

Bingham says, on the morning of the 11th 
of August, he met Walker going to the Bates 
House. "I asked him why he was going? 



He said he had to meet these gentlemen by 
appointment. I understood him to say that 
they were rebel officers. * * He said that 
they were on their way to Chicago to take 
charge of the rebel prisoners when they were 
released from Camp Douglas. It was neces- 
sary that he should see them to tell them that 
the wliole scheme was stopped. He met me 
afterward, and said that he had seen them, 
and they had gone on and stopped all ope- 
rations at that time for the release of the 
prisoners." 

The arrival of the rebel colonels at the 
Bates House here, from the rebel army, is most 
conclusive proof of the direct communication 
and connection of this order with the rebel 
insurgents. But twenty days elapsed be- 
tween the time when the plan is agreed upon 
at Chicago, before that intelligence is trans- 
milted to the rebel authorities, and in pursu- 
ance of that intelligence the rebel emissaries 
arrived at this point to take part in this in- 
surrection. Their couriers must have been 
swift and sure. 

Stidger says that on the 29th of July, he 
saw Dodd, and Dodd said to him: "He there- 
fore wished me to go home, and get twenty or 
thirty good runners, so that as soon as Judge 
Bullitt returned they might have been sent 
off. He said the programme was arranged, 
and every thing ready." Bullitt also told 
Stidger that "the programme was all arranged 
for this uprising." On the 2d of August, 
Stidger says Dodd told me "what the pi"o- 
gramme was, and impressed upon me the im- 
portance of secrecy." 

Stidger also learned that "their difference 
at Chicago was whether they should wait un- 
til the rebel forces should be sent into Eastern 
Kentucky to co-operate with them, or to make 
their uprising now, and co-operate with the 
rebel forces when Davis could send them." 
" Bowles at first objected to this uprising until 
the rebels should invade the eastern part of 
the State, as he said they would. * * He 
would consent to the uprising on the 15th or 
16th of August, as Dodd had said, provided 
Colonel Syphert, Colonel Jesse, and Walker 
Taylor would assist in the capture of Louis- 
ville, until the forces of this State could get 
there." 

Piper also told Stidger that "he was carry- 
ing orders, or that he had orders from Mr. 
Vallandigham to Judge Bullitt and Dr. Bowles. 
They were orders with respect to the time set 
for the uprising of the order." 

Bowles also said to Stidger, that the pro- 
gramme Dodd had given him, " was the pro- 
gramme agreed on at Chicago." 

Heffren confirms the statements of other 
witnesses in regard to this scheme of revolu- 
tion, and said it failed partly on account of 
Kerr's exposure, and also, "because the army 
of the Confederacy did not come through Cum- 
berland Gap, as they had agreed to, or as it 
was reported they had agreed to do." 

The revolutionary purposes of the order were 
also shown in the speech made at the time of 
the Chicago Convention, August 29th, 1864, to 
the conclave of the Sons of Liberty, by Mr. 
Moss, of Missouri. After describing the ia- 



280 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



dignities suffered by members of the order, in 
that State, he said: "If this organization was 
worth any thing, if it was intended to be effi- 
cient in the restoration of the Government 
under the Constitution, that now was the prop- 
er time to strike; that these indignities were 
unbearable; that if they had the true Ameri- 
can blood in them, they would not bear it any 
iL'Uger, but would strike now." 

These, then, were the chief schemes and pur- 
poses of the order, as explained and defined 
by the arcts of its members. These were the 
means by which they proposed to carry their 
purposes into execution. These, in brief, are 
the acts done iu pursuance of the original 
combination; and the culmination of all these 
acts on the day assigned, was but the natural 
ijutgrowth, the proper and natural consumma- 
tiou of the principles and purposes which they 
had sworn to maintain by force of arms, if 
nccessai'y. I therefore say that each member 
of this conspiracy, who took upon himself the 
oaths of the first, second and third degrees of 
this order, or of the first degree alone, after 
fully understanding the lessons and princi- 
ples of the order, as explained in the Ritual, 
was responsible for every one of these acts 
done by the leaders of this order. There is 
no way by which they can relieve themselves 
from that responsibility. They must be held 
accountable for these acts. They were but 
carrying into practical application the theo- 
ries and principles they had all sworn to 
maintain. This organization, as a body, was 
the gathering together, to be wielded against 
the Government, of all the bitter and hostile 
elements in these Northern States. It was 
truly but a whited sepulcher. To the world it 
exhibited nothing of its inner corruption, but 
concealed its acts, principles and purposes. 
It concealed its very name, its very existence; 
but within it was filled with dead men's bones, 
and all manner of corruption. Over the doors 
of its temples should be inscribed the same 
maxim that the Roman people used as to their 
•vrn city, in the days of the Inquisition: 

" Vivere qui sanctu Tultis discedite Koma, 
Omnia hie esse liceiit non licet esse probum." 

"He who would live holily, depart from Rome: 
All things are allowed here except to be upright." 

All things were allowed in these temples, 
except to be loyal, true, faithful to the mother 
who had cherished and nourished them: that 
dearest mother, our beloved country. 

CONNECTION OF THE ACCUSED WITH THIS ORDER. 

I now turn to examine briefly the evidence 
as it applies to the accused individually. 

WILLIAM A. BOWLES. 

First, then, in the order of their arraign- 
ment, I shall consider the proof as it relates 
to the accused, William A. Bowles. The ar- 
gument of Mr. Ray, the able counsel for Mr. 
Bowles and Mr. Humphreys, is an ingenious, 
courteous, elegant document. I think it puts 
the evidence in the best possible light for the 
defendants But in scanning that argument 
closely, we see its fallacies and its objects 
when we come to weigh it by the proof. The 



counsel puts Mr. Bowles before the public as 
more sinned against than sinning. This view 
of the case can only be sustained by a whole- 
sale rejection of the testimony of witnesses of 
undoubted veracity. While Dr. Bowles has 
not put himself forward as a public agitator, 
nor, by speeches to public assemblies, sought 
to stir up insurrection and dissatisfaction, he 
has, however, steadily and quietly, in the daily 
walks of life, in the order and in connection 
with it, moved forward and labored to secure 
the overthrow of the Government, even at the 
expense of insurrection and revolution. That 
he spent his own time and money freely 
for this object, there is no doubt. That in his 
old age, with the span of his life nearly closed, 
he leagued himself with younger men, and 
assisted them in their schemes of treason, is 
clearly proven. There is not, however, a par- 
ticle of evidence to show that his object, as 
claimed by his counsel, was simply to effect a 
compromise between the two sections. All his 
acts, and those of his co-conspirators, recog- 
nize the rebels as friends of civil liberty, and 
his and their friends; and the Government, 
and those who administered it, and its sup- 
porters, as enemies and usurpers, whom he 
and they hated with a hatred unutterable and 
beyond measure. 

With these cardinal principles, the accused, 
William A. Bowles, put himself in communi- 
cation, and acted in concert with those whose 
iron hands were grappling at the throat of the 
Republic. 

The testimony shows that William A. Bowles 
was initiated into the Grand Council Degree 
of the Order, on the 10th of September, 1863. 
Mr. Harrison testifies to this positively, and 
identifies the accused, William A. Bowles, as 
the person initiated that day. He was a mem- 
ber of the Military Committee appointed at 
that time. He spoke at considerable length 
on the features of the military bill. Hia 
speech was "approving of the military bill." 
He was present at the State Council held Feb- 
ruary 16th and 17th, 1864. The same witness 
testifies that Bowles was present, and was 
"elected in the South-east District" as its 
Major General. Wilson testifies that Dr. 
Bowles was present at the State Council, 
which, he thinks, was held about the 6th of 
November, 1863. A military committee was 
appointed at that meeting. Wilson says: "I 
thought from the actions of Dr. Bowles, he 
must be the chairman of that committee, as he 
made a verbal report." This was the meeting 
at which Dodd proposed "tp kick down the 
walls of common decency, and talk treason 
for awhile;" and spoke of revolution as one 
of the ulterior plans of the organization, if 
necessity required it. Here, then, was the ex- 
planation of the intents and purposes of the 
order, in the presence of the accused, boldly 
and without reserve, to the assembled mem- 
bers of the order, moving forward to its ac- 
complishment. Supreme Councils were held 
in Cliicago, in the latter part of September, 
18()3, and in New York in October or Novem- 
ber, and also in the following February. 

Harrison said he understood Bowles was 
piesent at the Supreme Council in September, 



TREASON TRIALS AT Es^DIANAPOLIS. 



281 



and adds: "I got this information from Dodd." 
Harrison sent to Dr, Bowles two copies of the 
printed proceedings of the February Grand 
Council, with the Constitution of the County 
and Branch Temples. He says that Dr. Bowles 
was present at the State Council of June 14th, 
1864. 

The military bill was changed in the Feb- 
ruary Council at Bowles' suggestion. Harri- 
son says: "He was elected [Major General] 
on that occasion. A portion of that bill was 
changed, and I did not hear him object after 
the bill was changed." 

Heffren states that he made a change in the 
districts defined by the bill, and then "Dr. 
Bowles was unanimously elected in place of 
McGrane." 

Mr. Bingham, another witness for the Gov- 
ernment, and a member of the order, testifies 
that "Colonel Bowles, the accused," was pres- 
ent at the February Council. Also, that "about 
the middle of May, Dr. Bowles, Mr. Dodd, Judge 
Bullitt, and Barrett were at my office, * * •■• 
and supposed that they were all members of the 
order." Here we find Dr. Bowles moving about, 
and in close communion with the leading and 
most venomous and reckless of these conspir- 
ators. The Commission will recollect another 
fact — that this assemblage of these leading 
conspirators here was in May, and, also, that 
it was in May of the same year that the lead- 
ing members of this order were experimenting 
with this Greek fire in the basement of some 
building in your city, on Sunday, while your 
citizens were attending public worship. Un- 
doubtedly these were the men who were super- 
intending those experiments. 

Bingham testifies that Bowles was present at 
Chicago; that Dodd informed him that Dr. 
Bowles was present at Chicago, where "a rev- 
olution had been determined upon." 

Stidger says that in his interview with 
Bowles, "he told me that he was a military 
chief of the order. * * He said that the 
forces of Indiana would concentrate in Ken- 
tucky, and make Kentucky their battle-ground ; 
that the forces in Illinois would concentrate in 
St. Louis, and co-operate with the forces in 
Missouri; that Illinois would furnish 50,000, 
Missouri 30,000, and Price was to invade the 
State with 20,000 men, and with that 100,000 
men they were to hold and permanently occupy 
that State; and the troops of Indiana and Ohio 
concentrate at Louisville. 

"He wanted to know how many men Ken- 
tucky could furnish, and stated that a rebel 
force, under Buckner, would come into the 
eastern part of the State, and with these forces 
they intended to hold Kentucky. 

"He told me that this order was made out 
of the Knights of the Golden Circle, of which 
he had been a member; and that he resurrected 
this order out of it." 

Stidger visited Bowles again at French Lick 
Springs, on the 28th of May. In that inter- 
view Bowles "repeated again his revolution- 
ary programme in connection with Price and 
Buckner." 

This evidence of ^Ir. Stidger stands unim- 
peached and uncontradicted; and I here ven- 
ture to say that no witness ever came upon the 



witness-stand and testified to so many distinct 
facts, dates, places, and persons — every word 
being recorded as he stated it^ — that has been 
more triumphantly corroborated by all the dif- 
ferent witnesses that have testified than Mr. 
Stidger. AVhile every effort has been made by 
the defense to break in upon the strength of 
his testimony, to find some slight variations 
upon which to base a probability of mistake; 
yet in every instance the subsequent proof, 
and the investigation of the facts, have all 
shown that Stidger was exactly right, and 
truthful, and triumphantly illustrates the old 
adage, "Truth is ever consistent." 

Stidger goes on to say that, at this same time, 
"He [Bowles] also told me of the change in the 
Supreme Commander to Vallandigham, and 
that he had been appointed a commissioner to 
visit Vallandigham in Canada." 

"Also, that Bowles stated to him, at the same 
interview, that on Sunday, May 22, himself, 
Dodd, and a Dutch chemist, experimented with 
Greek fire, at Indianapolis, and that they had 
nearly brought it to perfection, and that Bullitt 
knew how it was made. That they intended 
to use it for the destruction of Government 
property; that the Jeff Davis government was 
to pay them ten per cent, for all the property 
destroyed, taking the estimate, as given in the 
Northern papers, of the amount destroyed. He 
also told me that the two boats burned at the 
Louisville wharf, last spring, and boats belong- 
ing to the Government, that had been destroyed 
on the Mississippi river and elsewhere, had 
been burned by the Greek fire." 

Here again is a singular corroboration of 
Stidger's testimony. Wilson testifies that Bar- 
rett stated to the members of the order, at 
Chicago, that he was expressly authorized by 
the rebel government to pay this ten per cent, 
for the destruction of Government property. 
It can not be claimed that there was any col- 
lusion between Stidger and Dr. Wilson; the 
fact is, they have never met. 

On the 28th of June, 1864, Booking exhibited 
his conical shell, and a diagram of the spher- 
ical shell, and explained the principle of the 
two: Bowles was present. About the 1st of 
June, "Bullitt and others met at Kalfus' office, 
in Loilisville, and decided that Coffin should 
be murdered." They sent, by Stidger, a mes- 
sage to Bowles to see that it was done; it was 
delivered, and Bowles said, "I will put two 
men on his track." Stidger testifies that, at a 
meeting of the State Council, held on the 14th 
of June, 1864, at which Bowles was present, a 
committee on military aifairs was appointed; 
and that "Milligan, Bowles, McBride, and Dr. 
Gatling, were four of the military committee. 
* * * They reported a bill setting forth 
their views that the order ought to be organ- 
ized as a military organization at once, and 
armed." He testifies further, that the list of 
Major Generals was called over, including 
Bowles, as "the major-generals, by virtue ot 
their rank, were, ex officio, members ot the Su- 
preme Council." The day after the Council, 
June 15, Bowles, Dodd, and Milligan went to 
Hamilton, Ohio, to receive an exiled enemy of 
his country, the Supreme Commander of the 
Sons of Liberty, C. L. Vallandigham. Bowles 



282 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



stated iu the Council, on the 14th of June, as 
Stidger testifies, that he had "a military organ- 
ization " in his county, of 900 men, armed and 
equipped;" and "that he had an arrangement 
with a man to furnish any number or kind of 
arms." At another time he stated to Stidger 
that "they [the order] would go to Kentucky 
and have a regular understanding with the 
Confederates, and act in concert with them; 
and that they had sent a man named Dickersou 
to Richmond, to have the Confederate authori- 
ties send an invading force to act in concert 
with their order." 

In one of the last interviews between Stidger 
and Bowles, the question of revolution was 
freely discussed. Stidger says: "Bowles at 
first objecteel to this uprising until the rebels 
should invade the eastern part of the State, as 
he said they would. * * * * Bowles said 
he would consent to the uprising on the 15th 
or 16th of August, as Dodd had said, provided 
Colonel Syphert, Colonel Jesse, and Walker 
Taylor would assist in the capture of Louis- 
ville, until the forces in this State could get 
there." "Bowles asked me [Stidger] if I could 
have three or four thousand lances made; .... 
he wanted three or four thousand men armed 
with lances and revolvers; he said he could 

make them of good service He told me 

that he had spent $2,000 .... for the benefit 
of the order;" and that "he cared nothing 
about the election; he was satisfied Lincoln 
would be elected; he wanted the time spent in 
perfecting the organization, and getting ready 
for the uprising." 

Piper stated to Stidger that Bowles had 
charge of the release of the rebel prisoners at 
Johnson's Island, or Rock Island. This Piper 
represented himself as having "an appointr- 
meut on Vallandigham's stafl"; he said that he 
was carrying orders, or that he had orders 
from Mr. Vallandigham to Judge Bullitt and 
Dr. Bowles. * * They were orders as to the 
time set for the uprising of the order." Bowles 
told Stidger, "we " had sent Booking to Canada, 
"before he was admitted into the order, to see 
if he was willing to spend his money in exper- 
imenting for the benefit of the Order of Sons 
of Liberty." This experimenting was to bring 
to greater destructive perfection those shells, 
and Bocking's Greek fii-e. Stidger visited 
Bowles about the Gth of August, after he had 
obtained the programme from Dodd, and he 
Bays: "I told him the programme as Dodd 
had given it to me; and he said that was the 
programme agreed on at Chicago, and that 
Dodd had no right to change it; that they 
should have waited the action of the rebel 
forces; but finally, he had determined he would 
act without the co-operation of the rebel forces, 
if he could get the co-operation of three rebel 
colonels." 

Ilefi^ren testifies that James B. Wilson, a 
member of the order, showed him, last sum- 
mer, $1,000, and remarked, "There was one 
thousand he had just got from Dr. Bowles to 
procure arms and ammunition for our county ;" 
that Dodd and Walker liad received $100,000 
each, and "a portion of it was to go to Dr. 
Bowles, to be spent in his part of the State in 
purchasing arms and ammunition." These 



arms were to be used for arming the order. 
He adds, that the military objects were dis- 
cussed by some members at a State Council, 
in February, 1864, and that "Dr. Bowles was 
probably there one morning when we talked 
about it." He says Wilson told him "that 
Bowles had made an arrangement to have 
nine companies of infantry, one of lancers, 
and one section of artillery, to comprise each 
regiment in this order." Wilson also stated 
to Hefl:'ren that "about the 16th of August, Dr. 
Bowles had sent a man to see General Price, 
but he had not returned. « * » * Dj-, 
Wilson said Dr. Bowles' man had gone to see 
Price, and another to Richmond, to arrange 
for troops to come through Cumberland Gap, 
and when they returned, which they expected 
would be before the 16th of August, 1864, this 
uprising would take place." 

The cross-examination of Hefifren develops 
the fact that Dr. Bowles was the ranking ma- 
jor-general of the order in this State, and 
that Dodd stated at the Februarj- meeting 
"that Dr. Bowles was boss of the whole ma- 
chine of the military part of the order.' 

James B. Wilson, to whom I have heretofore 
referred — a man whose candid bearing, delib- 
eration, and evident reluctance to testify, 
must have convinced every one who heard 
him, of the unvarnished truth of every word 
he uttered; who overstated nothing, and only 
stated that which he was compelled to by his 
oath and the direct questions propounded to 
him — testifies that he attended the Chicago 
conclave of July 20, which Mr. Barrett, of 
Missouri, said "was to be composed of the 
military men of the order." Bullitt, of Ken- 
tucky, Barrett, of Missouri, Piper, of Illinois, 
and Dodd and Bowles, of this State, were 
there. Barrett made a speech, in which he 
unfolded the programme of the revolution, 
and asked the co-operation of the order in 
Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Ken- 
tucky, with the South; and in the name of 
the South, tendered $2,000,000 to arm the 
order, and pay for the destruction of Gov- 
ernment property. He referred to the de- 
struction of Government property at Louis- 
ville, St. Louis, and on the Ohio river, on 
which the ten per cent, premium had been 
paid. The witness adds: "I afterward learned 
from Dr. Bowles that the means employed was 
Greek fire." 

Both Wilson and Hefifren testify to a signal 
flag to be used by the order, in case of a rebel 
invasion, to protect property, which was men- 
tioned by Bowles to Dr. Wilson. 

To gain admittance for Wilson and Greene 
into the Chicago conclave, Bowles reported 
them on his staff. 

Stidger testifies that the contingency on 
which Bowles placed the revolution, and his 
willingness that it should take place, was the 
co-operation of the rebels. Communication 
with rebels was spoken of at Chicago. 

Wilson says: "I think Dr. Bowles said mes- 
sengers were sent to the rebels. * * « I 
think they were sent into Kentucky and Mis- 
souri; * * I inferred it was to be with 
Price and Buckner, because they were to be 
co-operating forces in case of an uprising. 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



283 



* » « The forces of Southern Indiana were 
to be rendezvoused at a place some eight or 
ten miles from New Albany. * * * It was 
expected they would be under Dr. Bowles.' 

Wilson further says: "I was furnished with 
$1,000 by Dr. Bowles for the purchase of arms 
for those of the order who were understood to 
be unable to purchase arms themselves. * * 
I went to Mr. Kent, of New Albany, to see 
about the purchase of arms.'' 

R. C. Booking, now in prison, and awaiting 
his trial — the only witness introduced in be- 
half of the accused, AVm. A.Bowles — testified, 
when put upon the stand by the defense, that 
Bowles "asked me if I would show him and 
his friends some of the shells and the Greek 
fire ; I told him yes. * « * » Dr. Bowles 
said he would see some of his friends, and see 
if something might not be done so that I might 
get along with the shells." The result was 
that Booking received §200 from Bowles, or 
through his agency. 

Gentlemen of the Commission, I have no 
comments to make upon this testimony. I 
leave it to you in all its naked force. I have 
extracted and collated the evidence in refer- 
ence to this accused, and I present the results 
of my examination, verbatim, as it appears 
upon the record. I leave the evidence thus 
presented, to answer the truly beautiful and 
sympathetic appeal of his counsel, Mr. Ray. 
It is with as deep sorrow and heart-felt regret 
as the counsel himself can feel, that I submit 
this conclusive record against this white- 
haired old man. I look upon him and the 
crimes he has committed, and those he has 
contemplated against his country, against the 
generations that are to come after him — and 
my heart bleeds that designs so foul and un- 
natural should ever have existed in any hu- 
man heart. I pity him. I pity him that he 
was so constituted, or has so corrupted the 
spirit with which God endowed him, as to be 
capable of such crimes. I pity him that his 
immortal soul — that spark of omniscience — 
should enter upon its new life in the unknown 
spirit land, loaded with such infamy and deg- 
radation; but while I have sympathy and pity 
for the man, for what he must suffer in case 
of conviction, I look about me, and over this 
wide-spread and once beautiful and peaceful 
land, and I see patriots with whitened locks, 
and millions of defenseless women and little 
children, with outstretched hands, appealing 
to Almighty God for protection from the trea- 
son that would plot, and the traitors who 
would destroy — from the rebels who, with fire 
and sword, would bring desolation upon all 
our fair land — from the wicked and misguided 
men who have caused a wail of anguish and 
bereavement to ascend from almost every 
hearth — from those who have sent the maimed, 
the crippled, and the suffering remnants, of 
once vigorous manhood to sit ever by your 
firesides, to be met ever upon your streets — and 
from all who, from weakness or wickedness, 
have aided and abetted this monstrous con- 
spiracy. I say that while I look with pity 
upon the man, and upon his unfortunate con- 
dition, there is a broader sympathy and a 
broader duty that would lead me to sympa- 



thize with the suffering that he and such as 
he have caused, and that he and such as he 
must cause, if permitted to live and move for- 
ward in this work of treason, destruction, 
desolation and death. 

LAMBDIN p. MIIiLIGAN. 

It seems to be admitted by the counsel for 
the accused that Mr. Milligan was a member 
of the order, and had attended the Grand 
Council, and, therefore, a third degree mem- 
ber; also, that he received the appointment of 
major-general. Upon these points there is no 
difference of opinion. 

Samuel F. Day testifies that Milligan was 
present at the Grand Council here in Septem- 
ber, and states that he made some remarks to 
their lodge after his return. This Grand 
Council is the one at which the military bill 
was adopted, and the major-generals elected. 
Mr. Harrison testifies as to the appointments 
of the major-generals at that meeting. Har- 
rison thinks 5lilligan was absent from one of 
the State Councils, and thinks it that held on 
the 16th and 17th of February, 1864. After 
naming delegates elected at the September 
State Council to the Supreme Council, Har- 
rison says: "Milligan was elected a delegate 
to the Supreme Council. I understood Dodd 
that Milligan was present at the Supreme 
Council held at Chicago or New York. * * 
The first meeting was held in Chicago in the 
latter part of the month of September, 1863." 

Here, we see in the very opening of the evi- 
dence that Mr. Milligan was one of the prime 
movers, one of the main spirits in this organ- 
ization as far back as September, 1863. At 
that time Mr. Milligan was a prominent leader 
of the radical peace wing of the Democratic 
party — that part of the Democratic party so 
frequently charged with affiliation and sym- 
pathy with rebels and traitors. For the 
Court to understand exactly Mr. Milligan's 
position in the order, his sentiments in join- 
ing it, and what would be his position to- 
ward the Government, separate and apart 
from the order, they must understand his 
position at the beginning of his connection 
with it. 

The evidence of Mr. Milligan's friends, the 
witnesses he has introduced upon the stand, 
have been harmonious upon this one fact, 
that Mr. Milligan was a bitter partisan, a 
hater of the Administration, and a leader of 
the ultra peace wing of the Democratic party. 
He then enters this organization, that har- 
monizes with his own sentiments, with his pe- 
culiar views as to State rights. State sover- 
eignty, the usurpations of the Administration 
and the different departments of the Govern- 
ment, and the unconstitutionality of the war, 
and whose members are the bitter opponents 
of all the measures to aid in efficiently car- 
rying forward that war. 

In considering this evidence, gentlemen, we 
must look into the surroundings of the men, 
and the circumstances of the country at that 
time. Did Mr. Milligan, with these political 
views, and his undoubted ability, enter this 
order as one likely to hold back from any of 
the purposes enunciated in the ritual or the 



284 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



obligation, or from any of the schemes advo- 
cated by any of the leaders of the order, as 
shown by the proof? Were not all these sen- 
timents of the order exactly in consonance 
with the opinions and principles entertained 
by Mr. Milligan himself? Indeed, the princi- 
ples of the order are so much like him, that 
to him might almost be credited their paternity. 
■With the views which he originally held, and 
the principles of the order, to which he as- 
sented, and which, with his intelligence, he 
could not have failed to understand, with his 
nerve and daring, is he not exactly the man 
to have undertaken to put into practical oper- 
ation the theories which he and they held? 

The only question now, in considering the 
evidence, is to find the degree of guilt of the 
accused. That they are all guilty is estab- 
lished the moment you prove that they are 
members of the order; that they have assented 
to the principles and taken the obligation of 
the order. The plea of ignorance, of want of 
knowledge, and want of assent on the part of 
the counsel for Mr. Milligan, will not sufiBce 
in the case of a man of Mr. Milligan's nerve, 
energy,' and intelligence. It is asking this 
Court to believe an unreasonable thing, to ask 
them to believe that this man would enter into 
any organization, ascend to its highest de- 
grees, and be endowed with its highest honors, 
without studying thoroughly the cardinal 
principles upon which it was based. An igno- 
rant man might; an intelligent man never 
would. 

Let us briefly glance at the testimony to see 
what are the facts in regard to Mr. Milligan's 
co-operation with the leaders of the order, in 
carrying into execution its purposes. It has 
been denied that Mr. Milligan ever accepted 
the position of a major-general in this order, 
or that there was any proof to show that he 
had any knowledge that such an appointment 
had been made. On the cross-examination of 
Harrison, his attention was particularly called 
to the presence of Mr. Milligan, at the Septem- 
ber meeting, during that part of the session 
when the military bill was discussed, and he 
■answers, "I can not say positively whether he 
was." 

Elliot Robertson, of Randolph county, testi- 
fies that Nathan Brown was a delegate from 
their lodge to Indianapolis, in September, 
1863; on his return he "spoke of the State 
being divided into four military districts, and 
that a man by the name oi' Milligan com- 
manded our district." Mr. Harrison testifies 
tliat at Uie State Council, of November, 1863, 
Mr. MilRgan was present. At this meeting, 
Mr. Harrison testifies, nothing was said about 
tlie object of the military organization, "ex- 
cept that it was necessary to organize in a 
military capacity to protect the rights of the 
members against tlie encroaclimeuts of the 
Administration." Toward the close of the 
November Council, Dr. Wilson testifies that 
Dodd said "that he 'would kick down the 
walls of common decency,' or some such words, 
'and talk treason for awhile.' " I would call 
the attention of the Court to the fact that 
supposing Mr. Milligan had been elected a 
major-general of the order, in September, as 



testified to by difi'erent witnesses, and not 
contradicted by any, whether he could have 
come up to the November Council, and taken 
part in that meeting, where all the interests 
and purposes of the order Avere discussed, 
without being notified of such appointment. 
Is it reasonable, or rational, to believe that 
he could? He was elected by the delegates 
from the district represented; his election 
must have been known to all those delegates, 
and would not some one of them have apprised 
Mr. Milligan of his appointment? He held 
one of the four highest ofiices of the order 
in this State. Mr. Bingham also testifies that 
Mr. Milligan was present at this November 
Council. 

Thus it is established beyond question, that 
Milligan was present at this meeting; it is 
not denied by the defense. I now desire to 
call the attention of the Court particularly to 
what treason it was, as sworn to by Wilson, 
that Dodd talked at this meeting, at which 
Milligan was present. Wilson says: "He 
[Dodd] stated if the purposes of this order 
could not be carried out, as explained by Mr. 
Wright, there were other plans that could be 
resorted to. They could very easily, if their 
organization was completed, take possession 
of the railroads, cut the telegraph wires, and 
throw in, at one time, troops enough at the 
capital to take the State Government, and 
have things their own way." Here was the 
scheme for the uprising, the insurrection, laid 
down to the members of this order, as early 
as November, 1863 — the same scheme, substan- 
tially, that was agreed upon in Chicago, to be 
carried out on the 16th of August, 1864. If 
Milligan was present at this November meet- 
ing, of which there is no doubt, then he did 
know that these were the ultimate treasonable 
purposes of the order. The plea of want of 
knowledge will not avail; it is contrary to 
reason, and directly contradicted by the evi- 
dence. 

The testimony of Samuel F. Winters, a wit^ 
ness for the accused, is that Mr. Milligan was 
not present at the State Council of February 
16 and 17, 1864, as he brought down, for Mr. 
Milligan, a packet of resolutions, which were 
afterward adopted as part of the platform of 
the order. Mr. Harrison testifies, that at this 
meeting the annual election of oflicers took 
place, and that Mr. Milligan was elected a 
major-general of the order in his district. 
Some weeks after, when the new ritual was 
printed, Harrison, as Grand Secretary, sent to 
each branch temple notice of the change, and 
copies of the proceedings of the State Council, 
and says that the package for Huntington 
county he directed to Mr. Milligan. 

Mr. Milligan was present at the Council of 
June 14, as Harrison, Stidger, and Ibach tes- 
tify; and if Mr. Ibach, who is relied upon 
fully by the counsel in his argument for Mr. 
Milligan, is correct, in testifying that Mr. 
Milligan was not present as a delegate from 
Huntington temple, lie must have been there 
by virtue of his military position; and this 
idea would seem to bo favored by Section 3 of 
Article 2 of the Co:astitution of the Grand 
Council, which says "The members of th» 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



285 



Grand Commander's staflf, and all military 
officers above the rank of colonel, shall be ex 
officio members of this Grand Council, and 
entitled to the sign and to participation in its 
deliberations." Thus, gentlemen, by your own 
witnesses, you have Mr. Milligan present at 
this council by virtue of being major-genei-al 
of this oi'der; he is here exercising the func- 
tions of his office. 

Mr. Harrison, the Grand Secretary of the 
order, says: "No person, to my knowledge, 
ever entered the Grand Council, who was not 
a member." Stidger testifies that Milligan 
was present when Bowles reported that "he 
had 900 men in his county, organized, armed, 
and equipped;" also, that, "in the afternoon, 
the list of major-generals was called; " "I do 
not remember that he [Milligan] made any 
particular response." « * * "The list of 
major-generals was called in this way, they 
being ex officio delegates to the Supreme Coun- 
cil. Milligan made no objection to going that 
I heard." Also, that on the 15th, in pursuance 
of a resolution of Council, Milligan went to 
Hamilton, with Bowles and Dodd, to welcome 
Vallandigham. Here were the three high dig- 
nitaries of the order going over to Hamilton, 
to welcome, in the name of the traitors of In- 
diana, this returning exile. Can it be claimed, 
with any show of reason, that Dodd went there 
as Grand Commander, Bowles as Major Gen- 
eral, and Milligan only as a private member 
of the order? Is it not more reasonable to 
suppose that that Council sent three of the 
most prominent, influential men, and the 
highest officers of the order? 

Among the leading men of the order sum- 
moned by Dodd to attend a consultation on 
Tuesday, August 2d, in relation to the revolu- 
tion, Mr. Harrison testifies that Mr. Milligan 
was included. He says: "Mr. Dodd informed 
me that he intended sending for Mr. Milligan, 
for Dr. Bowles, Mr. Humphreys, and Dr. Yea- 
kle. * » I went to Mr. Milligan." 

"Q. Did you see him? 

"A. I did. 

"Q. Did you tell him your message? 

"A. I did. 

"Q. AVhat did he say? 

"A. He said he did not know whether he 
could be present, but would try to be." 

Here was the Grand Commander summon- 
ing his military chieftains about him, to have 
a council of war, to when and how they should 
put their forces into the field. The object of 
this meeting or council of war, as stated by 
Dodd to Stidger, was to set the time, the exact 
day, on which the revolution should take 
place, in this State. Stidger states that Dodd 
showed and read to him, about the 2d of Aug- 
ust, letters from two or three gentlemen; that 
Dodd's "idea was to go ahead on the 15th or 
16th of August, and these letters from these 
men agreed with him. * * He had sent 
them word, and they did not come." 

It becomes a matter of inquiry here, who 
these letters were probably from. They were 
certainly from persons to whom Dodd had im- 
parted his scheme. The evidence justifies 
this conclusion. Now, who in this State did 
he probably impart that scheme to, either by 



letter or in person? Certainly not to more 
than those whom he summoned to consult with 
him. Those persons he summoned for consul- 
tation, were all Major Generals in the order, 
or had held that position. Those who did not 
come, knowing the importance of this meet- 
ing, as they must have known of Dodd and 
Bowles' trip to Chicago and the plan agreed 
on there, undoubtedly wrote to Dodd, either 
assenting to or dissenting from his going for- 
ward with his scheme of revolution. Then 
the conclusion is inevitable, that Milligan, af- 
ter he was sent to as one of those parties for 
consultation, must hav* either come in per- 
son, or have written to Dodd. If he wrote to 
Dodd, then no doubt he indorsed his scheme; 
for it is proven that these letters from those 
who did not come, agreed with him in his pro- 
posed uprising on the 16th. 

It is not to be presumed by this Court, that 
Dodd, with all the hair-brained fanaticism 
that is claimed against him now, by his then 
co-workers, fast friends and associates, would 
have dreamed of going ahead with this revo- 
lution without the assent of his military 
chieftains. The prominent members of the 
order knew who were Major Generals, who 
were to command them; and if those Major 
Generals held back, here was mutiny and in- 
surrection in their own camp, that would 
have defeated the whole scheme of revolution. 
Had Milligan made any such attempt at hold- 
ing back, or refused to co-operate with Dodd 
in this scheme, it could easily have been 
shown. If it had been made, either by letter 
or orally, he could have proven it before this 
Court. The burden of proof is upon him to 
show that fact, and if he does not show it — • 
and he has failed to do so — it is to be pre- 
sumed against him, by this Court, that he 
acted in concert with Dodd, and assented to 
all his revolutionary schemes. 

Now let us see whether Mr. Milligan's ac- 
tion subsequent to this occasion, was consist- 
ent with his knowledge of Dodd's plans and 
schemes. On the 13th of August, before the 
action of the State Central Committee had 
reached Mr. Milligan, he addressed a conven- 
tion of 5,000 men at Fort Wayne. In that 
speech, as a witness for the Government, W. 
S. Bush testifies, he made the following state- 
ments: 

"He referred to the country as desolated by 
the war and the oppressions of the Administra- 
tion. He spoke of tlie freedom of speech al- 
lowed, as simply that granted by a Lincoln 
mob — as a freedom in name rather than in fact." 
(Page 575.) "He stated that if the war was right 
the draft was right, and if they considered 
the war right, and were good citizens, they 
would not grumble about the draft." "He de- 
nied that the war was right, and proceeded to 
argue that, under the Constitution, the Presi- 
dent had no power to coerce a State; and 
asked if those who entered the army, would 
look in the future, for their laurels, to such 
battles as Bull Run, Chicamauga and Red 
river. He also appealed to them to consider 
the condition of their wives and cliildren at 
home, destitute, and dependent on the charity 
of their neighbors, if they entered the armyj 



286 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



and asked whether they considered it a duty 
to make such a sacrifice?"' (Page 576.) 

"He spoke of him (the President) as a ty- 
rant." (Page 577.) " He held that the war 
itself was disunion, and that the Union itself 
could not be restored by war." (Page 577.) 
That the war "had made the Government a 
despotism. 

"He treated the war Itself as a dissolution 
of the Government. 

"He spoke of the Government as a confed- 
eration of the several States rather than a 
unity." 

I asked the witness what Mr. Milligan sta- 
ted "as to the right of the Government of the 
United States to make war upon rebels, or 
those in rebellion against the General Govern- 
ment?" 

He answered: "He denied that right." 

Here we have from Mr. Milligan's own lips, 
a reiteration, to a public assemblage, of the 
•cardinal principles of the order itself. Here 
we have him trying to educate the masses of 
the Democratic party up to the disloyal stand- 
ard of this order. Here we have him advoca- 
ting and indorsing the principles avowed by 
the rebels in arms against the Government. 
The very principles for which they are light- 
ing to-day, he maintained in public speech 
loefore our people. The only difference be- 
tween Mr. Milligan and the most bitter rebel 
of them all, was that one was using his arms 
to enforce his principles, the other by his 
voice and pen attempted to sustain their ar- 
mies in that cause, weakening the cause of 
the Government, and adding numbers to the' 
rebel ranks. What could he do more? What 
would tend more effectually to stir up to in- 
surrection a brave people, than to teach them 
that their Government was waging an unjust 
war, an unconstitutional war; that it was 
forcing them to fight its battles of tyranny 
and oppression, against a people who were 
fighting simply for their just rights, for the 
right of a State to secede in its sovereign ca- 
pacity; that this Government was forcing 
them into her armies by legions, and slaugh- 
tering them by thousands, and then citing 
them to the battle-fields where that Govern- 
ment had been defeated: I ask what more ef- 
fective mode could have been chosen to give 
aid and sympathy to the enemy, to weaken the 
cause of the Government, to stir up the hearts 
of the people to opposition to this tyranny, 
oppression and outrage, that he had pictured 
had been perpetrated upon them by their Gov- 
ernment? 

I say, then, this speech was in entire keep- 
ing with the fact that Mr. Milligan must have 
known of the intentions and plan of Dodd 
for revolution. He was aiding that scheme as 
effectuiilly as he possibly could. He was sow- 
ing tlie seeds of bitterness in the hearts of the 
masses, the harvest of which was to be the 
garnering of the dead bodies of the peaceful 
citizens, defenseless women and little chil- 
dren of your land. 

We have heard much argumentation, much 
special pleading, and many elegant periods, 
from the counsel for the accused, based upon 
the action of Mr. Bingham and Mr. Kerr in 



stopping this revolution of their own will be- 
fore it had culminated. We have some little 
light upon this question as evidence that ia 
recorded matter made at the time. This is 
better evidence than the recollection or the 
oral explanation of these facts by any witness. 
It is a letter of Mr. Kerr's, directed to Mr. 
Bingham, and dated August 8, 1864. In that 
he says : "I am not content with the result of 
our conference on Friday. It is not decisive 
enough." Here was a member of that confer- 
ence, the man who brought about that meet- 
ing, and took more interest in it than any other 
member, was as honest as any one of them, 
and yet he states that the meeting was not de- 
cisive. He goes on, and says further: "it is 
enveloped in too much uncertainty. " If this 
whole scheme of revolution had been aban- 
doned by Dodd, and they had all resolved that 
nothing more was to be done in the matter, 
as the gentlemen argue and claim, why and 
wherefore was it enveloped in uncertainty? 
Further on he says: "There was apparent, on 
the part of certain bad and reckless men, too 
deep a determination to persist in their un- 
lawful and revolutionary purposes." Here is 
a letter written soon after this meeting, by 
Mr. Kerr, an honest and upright man, as is 
admitted by all, to another member of that 
meeting, in which he not only denies that the 
scheme had been abandoned and stopped, but 
affirmatively says, that there has been appa- 
rent, on the part of certain bad and reckless 
men, too deep a determination to persist in 
their unlawful and revolutionary purposes. 
Gentlemen, how do you explain this record 
made at the time? 

Then he goes on with this statement: "That 
they should have been required to come to a 
more definite and satisfactory abandonment 
of all such purposes." They should have 
done what they did not do, Mr. Kerr says. 
The testimony of Mr. Bingham, the testimony 
of all the witnesses upon this case, must be ex- 
plained with this light of Mr. Kerr's letter 
thrown upon it. Listen a little further to Mr. 
Kerr: "Ought we not to take further ac- 
tion before the early day to which we ad- 
journed? « » » It, must not be." What 
was this that must not be? Let the Court 
think for a moment, and answer the question. 
He adds: "It must be circumvented, and that 
speedily, and by us." What was this that must be 
circumvented speedily, and by us? Here is this 
letter dated the 8th of August, after this meet- 
ing had taken place, at which this witness un- 
dertook to say this whole scheme was stopped; 
urging Bingham to his utmost vigor to unite 
with him and all good men, in stopping what 
these gentlemen claim was stopped on the 4th 
of August, by Mr. Kerr. This is a singular 
position for Mr. Kerr, that he was appealing 
by the strongest exhortations, which words 
could utter, to the brother members of his 
party, and to his old friend, Mr. Bingham, to 
join him, and to assist by every means in their 
power to circumvent these bad men, and to 
stop this scheme — making these appeals on the 
8th to stop, as I before remarked, what he, 
Mr. Kerr, had stopped on the 4th! Is thii 
true? 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



287 



The entire proof made during this trial goes 
to show that the scheme of revolution never 
■was entirely abandoned. On or about the 
12th of August, at the identical meeting re- 
ferred to b3' Kerr in his letter as necessary to 
be held, some of the leading loyal Democrats 
of the State did get promises from Dodd and 
Walker to abandon their scheme. But that 
abandonment was simply of the time set for 
the insurrection; and those men moved for- 
ward just as earnestly and vigorously in 
their organization and purposes, afterward as 
before. The iirst lot of Dodd's arms, which 
Walker had purchased, ten boxes, were 
brought here and concealed, ready for use, 
about the 6th of August, two days after this 
first meeting, when this whole revolution was 
abandoned, as the defense claims. The next 
lot came on the 20th of August, two weeks af- 
terward; and yet we are told this whole 
scheme was abandoned, and nothing was done 
in pursuance of it. Gentlemen, the proof is 
against you. 

This conspiracy and revolution failed, sim- 
ply because the hand of the Government was 
at its throat, and the strong military arm of 
the Government had fallen upon it; its mailed 
hand had grappled it, and its giant-like grip 
was all the more determined in that its dragon- 
like foe was both subtle and strong. 

To rebut the testimony of Mr. Bush in ref- 
erence to this speech of Mr. Milligan at Fort 
Wayne, the accused put upon the stand Mr. 
Winters, the editor of the Huntington Demo- 
crat, who started out with the assertion, in re- 
ply to a question of the accused: "I don't 
know what you mean by the word loyal." It 
did seem to me that this was the only unqual- 
ified, truthful utterance that the witness gave 
during his whole testimony. He admitted 
that in Mr. Milligan's speech, at Fort Wayne, 
he "denied the power to coerce States, but 
admitted th» power to coerce individual citi- 
zens." In his cross-examination he states that 
Mr. Milligan "has always maintained that a 
war against sovereign States was an absurd- 
ity. * * I have heard him say that the 
war was unconstitutional, and he was against 
it; '■ that he was opposed to the prosecution of 
the present war; and that *'he said at the Fort 
Wayne meeting that the existing war was an 
absurdity." 

This witness subscribed fully to the obliga- 
tion of the first degree of the Order of Amer- 
ican Knights. I read to him various extracts 
from Mr. Bush's report of that speech, as pub- 
lished in the Cincinnati Gazette, of August 
16th, and asked if they were correct. One of 
the extracts was as follows: 

"They (the States) were thirteen nations, 
and finally formed a Constitution, adopted 
separately by the several States, Virginia re- 
serving to herself the right at any time to 
withdraw from the Union. And what Vir- 
ginia has reserved, all the States had a right 
to reserve. Their action was based entirely 
on State rights. The Declaration of Indepen- 
dence states who is to be the judge when the 
(•J<-»yernment shall be subverted. It guaran- 
tees to the people the right of revolution when 
they can no longer tolerate the invasion of 



their rights. I do not mean that Governor 
Morton, or the Legislature, or any machinery 
of office, getting its authority from the people 
thro-ugh elections, is the State. But I mean 
that the free range of all its people is the 
State. The officers are the mere servants of 
the people, the mere agents of the Govern- 
ment. Where does sovereignty rest? It is 
time to settle this question. If you are wrong 
in your theories, you should change your prin- 
ciples. I know no sovereignty in the Federal 
Government, or in the State Government, as 
contra-distinguished from the people of the 
State. I believe in the doctrine of popular 
sovereignty, instead of sovereignty in the ma- 
chinery of the Government." 

I then asked the witness, is that a correct 
statement of what Mr. Milligan said on that 
point. Mr. Winters answered, "I don't recol- 
lect whether those are the exact words: I 
think that is the substance of what he said 
on that subjeoi." I read other paragraphs to 
him, and the whole effect of his testimony was 
to corroborate Mr. Bush's statement, and to 
certify to the correctness of his report. He 
says in answer to one question : "The deduc- 
tion made from his speech," referring to Mr. 
Milligan's speech at Fort Wayne, "was that 
the war was unconstitutional." 

Mr. Bird, one of Mr. Milligan's witnesses, 
and a Son of Liberty, in his cross-examina- 
tion, admitted that Mr. Milligan in that speech 
said the war was wrong. Bird's testimony as 
to that meeting, and what was said there by 
Mr. Milligan, entirely corroborates the testi- 
mony of Mr. Bush. At the time of this speech 
of Mr. Milligan's at Fort Wayne, the order 
was still in existence, as is proven by Mr. 
Harrison, who performed his official duties as 
Grand Secretary, up to August 20th, 1864, the 
day Mr. Dodd was still receiving arms for dis- 
tribution to the members of this order, and 
the day of Mr. Harrison's arrest. So that 
this order was in full and vigorous operation 
up to the day when the Government laid her 
hands upon it. In fact, it was in full opera- 
tion up to the session of the Chicago Conven- 
tion, as proved by Mr. Wilson; tip to the time 
of Dodd's arrest, September 3d, and the ar- 
rest of Bowles, Septembet 18th, as testified by 
Mr. HefFren. HeiFren says: "About the time of 
Dodd's arrest, I wrote a letter to each of the 
major-generals of the order. * » * Dr. 

Wilson had come to me and said that 

as I was Deputy Grand Commander, and Dodd 
was arrested, I must write to Mr. Vallandig- 
ham and each of the major-generals. I did 
not want to do so, but he insisted, and I wrote 
to Mr. Humphreys, Mr. Milligan, John C. 
Walker and Mr. Vallandigham. I wrote to 
Dr. Bowles, but as I understood he was ar- 
rested for harboring deserters, I did not send 
the letter." 

"Q. How did you write to Vallandigham? 

"A. As Supreme Commander of the Su- 
preme Council of the United States. The sub- 
st>ance of the letter was, should we submit or 
fight? 

"Q. Whom d^ you mean by 'we? ' 

"A. I meant the members of the Order of 
American Knigbts." 



288 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



This action on the part of Wilson, and 
Heffren, the Deputy Grand Commander of the 
order, was sometime after tiie 3d of Septem- 
ber, and shows that the order was in full force 
at that date. 

" Q. Did these gentlemen write back? 
" A. None but Mr. Milligan and Mr. Hum- 
phreys. Mr. Milligan's letter was signed by 
some gentleman as his student, as he was 
sick, and stated that it would not do at the 
present time, but that we must bide our time." 
This letter, written by Mr. Milligan's author- 
ity — for of course no one would open a letter 
written to Mr. Milligan, but himself, and 
whoever answered it must have done so by 
his instructions — shows that it was not in- 
surrection itself that he was opposed to, but 
that the time was not propitious. Mr. Milli- 
gan was a prominent member of the order, and 
one of its leaders. The question of his nomina- 
tion for Governor had been discussed in the Feb- 
ruary Council, as shown by Mr. Heffren's testi- 
mony ; it is also shown in the letter of Mr. 
Mill'igan to H. H. Dodd, dated May 9th, 1864, 
in which he declines the nomination of Gov- 
ernor at the hands of McDonald's friends, "be- 
cause," he says, "I could not represent them; 
there is no similarity between us. And all 
this is not so discouraging as the fact that 
men of the stamp of Judge Hanna, whose 
profession of principles I could represent, 
prefer McDonald on account of his supposed 
availability. It detracts much from my confi- 
dence in our ultimate success, when men of so 
much seeming patriotism, are willing for 
mere temporary purposes to abandon the 
great principles of civil liberty. What will 
those of less pretensions do, when the real 
contest comes; when life and property all de- 
pend on the issue; when bullets instead of 
ballots are cast, and when the halter is a pre- 
amble to our platform? For, unless Federal 
encroachments are arrested in the States by 
the efforts, as well of the Legislative as the 
Executive, then will our lives and fortunes fol- 
low where our honors will have gone before." 
It is an easy matter to get at the motives that 
actuated Mr. Milligan in his connection with 
this order, from this piece of record which he 
has left behind him. The lame manner in 
which his counsel has undertaken to explain 
this letter, is simply amusing. 

When wc recollect that the contest to which 
Mr. Milligan constantly looked forward, was 
the contest between the disaffected few of these 
free States — that class of people whom he 
represented, malcontents, who believe that 
the Government is usurping powers, and 
must bo expelled by force — and the Govern- 
ment. Entertaining these principles, he says 
in his letter, "when the real contest comes; 
when life and property all depend upon the 
issue; when bullets instead of ballots are 
cast, and when the halter is a preamble to our 
platform." For an explanation of what he 
means by this, he continues: "For unless 
Federal encroachments" — this was the power 
with which the contest was to be waged — "are 
resisted in the States, by the efforts as well of 
the Legislative as of the Executive, then will 
our lives and fortunes follow where our honors 



will have gone before." The real meaning 
and intent of this letter, and the purpose of 
this man in writing it, was this : every effort 
was being made by his party to get the ma- 
chinery of the State Government into their 
own hands, to obtain control of the Legisla- 
ture, and to have one of themselves elected 
Governor; then, with their theories of Gov- 
ernment, of State sovereignty, and of State 
rights, they could plant the State of Indiana 
against the Federal Government, and make 
Indiana a second South Carolina, to lead the 
van in establishing a North-western Confed- 
ei'acy! It was but again laying down an 
abominable plot of rebellion to be consum- 
mated in these Northern States, as it has been 
in the Southern; to blacken and desolate this 
beautiful land of ours, as it has blackened 
theirs; to send up from every hearth the wail 
of desolation and death that must follow in 
the wake of this phantom of secession 1 

To prove his loyalty, Mr. Milligan intro- 
duced a number of witnesses, most of whom 
were fellow-members of the conspiracy. Some 
of them, by their own showing, were disloyal. 
John Roach, one of his witnesses, in speaking 
of Mr. Milligan, said: "I heard him make 
some remarks, in which he held that some of 
the officers of the Government were exceeding 
the authority of law; he complained that they 
were not acting according to law;" in other 
words, he was repeating the principles of the 
Order of Sons of Liberty. Another witness, 
that Mr. Milligan put upon the stand to 
support his character for loyalty, etc., M. B. 
Brant, testified as follows: "Republicans re- 
garded him as connected with a secret organ- 
ization that is in favor of further secession 
among the States — a North-western Confeder- 
acy." The witness gives one reason why they 
regarded him as' disloyal, in these words : 
"Mr. Milligan made speeches a year ago last 
fall, and some persons in the Republican 
party began to regard him as a man who was 
opposed to the Government, and was willing 
and anxious that there should be a North- 
western Confederacy, and that he was in favor 
of it." 

Thus we see that Mr. Milligan's treason had 
not confined itself solely to his expressions 
and actions in connection with the ordei", bat 
that he was at his work of educating the masses 
of the Democratic party, and the people of the 
land, up to his disloyal standard. 

Witnesses were also introduced by Mr. Mil- 
ligan to impeach the reputation for truth and 
veracity of Dr. Zumro, a witness for the Gov- 
ernment. The doubtful loyalty of these men, 
who themselves indorsed the good character 
of Mr. Zumro, when thay joined the order 
with him, and the strength of the rebutting 
testimony of the witnesses in favor of the 
character of Dr. Zumro for truth and veracity: 
not only of those of his own political faith, but 
those opposed to him, and of members of the 
order, substantiate his truthfulness, and leave 
his testimony entitled to full credit. Dr. Zumro 
testifies that he was appointed one of a- com- 
mittee from the temple of the order in his 
township, to visit Mr. Milligan, in Hunting- 
ton, and learn what the order proposed to do 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



289 



about resisting the draft. He says: "Tasked 
Mr. Milligan his opinion as to whether we had 
better resist or not; he said it was as good a 
time now as any to resist." "He concluded 
that we should form in companies or squads, 
just as we could; that ten men were sufficient 
to start with." 

This is the evidence, substantially, in refer- 
ence to Mr. Milligan, for and against him. It 
all shows that he was really the right arm of 
this conspiracy in this State; the active, ener- 
getic, and venomous leader. A man of un- 
questioned ability and determination, and 
with a heart full of hatred, envy, and malice, 
he moved forward in this scheme of revolution 
with a coolness and intensity of purpose, not 
exceeded by any .other member of the con- 
spiracy. His intelligence and ability gave 
him a powerful influence for evil, and he used 
that power to the utmost. I can offer no bet- 
ter comment on the testimony bearing on the 
case of Mr. Milligan, than by quoting the 
eloquent words of my friend, Mr. Ray. He 
says: "It is another and a wicked thing to go 
bawling about the country, and in flaming 
speech, and mock patriotism, arraigning the 
authorities as usurpers, tyrants and despots; 
poisoning the public heart against those in 
authority — clamoring for peace in the face of 
embattled armies — fanning the embers of dis- 
cord and revolt — kindling, by incendiary ap- 
peals, the fires of insurrection and revolution, 
and finally identifying himself with the cause 
of rebels and traitors, and lending himself in 
thought and deed, by night and by day, in 
secret and in public, giving aid and comfort 
to the public enemy against his own Govern- 
ment — this is conspiracy/ and treason — it has all 
the disloyal lineaments of treasonable deform- 
ity, and neither eloquence nor art, nor paint- 
ing, nor poetry, can change it — its office is 
discord, war, and misery." 

The counsel must have had Mr. Milligan in 
his mind's eye when penning that eloquent 
description of a conspirator and a traitor. 

ANDREW HUMPHREYS. 

We come now to the consideration of the 
evidence in its bearing upon the accused, 
Andrew Humphreys. It has been conclusively 
shown that Mr. Humphreys belonged to this 
conspiracy: that he was, at least, a third de- 
gree member, and attended, beyond question, 
the State Council of the 14th of June last, in 
the evening. There is no evidence introduced 
inconsistent with this, and all the evidence 
introduced by the defense corroborates the 
Government witnesses, in stating that he was 
here in the evening of the 14th of June. If 
the order in his township had been abandoned 
and the papers destroyed in February or March 
previously, as Mr. Humphreys has attempted to 
show, then he must have attended this Grand 
Council in June, by virtue of his military 
rank. If the order in his township had been 
abandoned, he did not come up as a delegate 
from that temple. This circumstance goes 
strongly to support the theory that he did 
accept and hold the position nominally of a 
major-general in this order. The evidence 
n gainst Mr. Humphreys, we will briefly review. 
19 



When Mr. Humphreys became a member of 
the order, is not definitely proven. A branch 
temple was organized in Linton, in September, 
18G3, as W. G. Moss, a witness for the accused, 
testifies. Mr. Moss and Mr. Heffren, who tes- 
tify that Mr. Humphreys told them that he 
had abandoned the order, both establish his 
membership up to at least February 16th, 1864. 
His membership, on the 10th of September, is 
proven by the witness, William M. Harrison, 
who testifies that the State Council of Septem- 
ber 10th, 1863, elected "Andrew Humphreys a 
major-general under that (the military) bill." 
Subsequently the witness says: "My under- 
standing of the matter was that appointments 
were made among members of the order only." 
He also names the delegates to the Council in 
Chicago, in September, 1863, and says: "At 
the meeting in September, John G. Davis and 
D. R. Eckels were elected delegates to the 
Council in Chicago, in September, 1868; and, 
I think, Humphreys also." He adds: "I un- 
derstood also that Humphreys was present at 
that meeting, and Yeakle and Dr. Bowles. I 
got this information from Dodd." Mr. Hum- 
phreys was re-elected a major-general at the 
February Council, while Major Conklin and 
Dr. Yeakle were superseded in their districts 
by Dr. Bowles and John C. Walker. He was 
recognized by the officers of the State Council 
as retaining his membership, a package of the 
proceedings of the February Council being 
addressed to him for the benefit of the order 
in Green county, some weeks after the session 
of that Council. The testimony of Stidger 
and of Harrison is positive as to the presence 
of Humphreys at the Council of June 14th. 
Harrison states that Mr. Humphreys was pres- 
ent. In the cross-examination he says: "He 
came into the meeting in the evening. I saw 
him in the room, not to exceed one-half or three- 
quarters of an hour, at that meeting. * * 
I saw him at the meeting before it adjourned." 
When asked whether he knew that Mr. Hum- 
phreys was a member of the order at all, he 
answered, "I khow it simply from the fact 
that I saw him at this meeting on the 14th of 
June. « » I recollect of no person coming 
in who was nut a delegate, and had not become 
a member * * No person, to my knowl- 
edge, entered the Grand Council who was not 
a member." 

Stidger testifies that Mr. Humphreys was 
present; that "Mr. Dodd told me it was An- 
drew Humphreys; that Mr. Dodd called over 
the list of major-generals, on which was the 
name of Andrew Humphreys, at that session." 

To rebut this testimony, Mr. Moss testifies 
that Mr. Humphreys could not have been 
present. He states that he carefully examined 
the account-books to determine that point. 
When asked, on cross-examination, whether 
Humphreys came to Indianapolis about that 
time, he answered: "1 am not certain of it. 
But I think he might have been here." I 
again asked, "Was he not here in the evening?" 
He answered: "I can not say; I have tried to 
find that out by looking at our books." 

In the re-examination, the witness strength- 
ens the evidence for the Government. He 
says: 



290 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



"The last entry in Humphreys' handwrit- 
ing, was on the 13th of June, about the last 
charge entered on the book that day." 

"Q. At what time would a man probably 
arrive here, who left Linton after the time 
when the last entry must have been made by 
Humphreys? 

"A. It would probably have been 6 or 7 
o'clock in the evening * * of June 14th." 

His membership in the order, just before 
the time of the June Council, is confirmed by 
another portion of Stidger's testimony, in 
reference to an interview with Bowles, on the 
28th of May: 

Bowles told me "to say to him [Bullitt] that 
he had seen Mr. Andrew Humphreys since 
their meeting at Indianapolis, and Mr. Hum- 
phreys had agreed to take the position of a 
Brigadier, and take charge of the forces in 
the rear in case of an uprising of the order." 

Stidger took that message to Bullitt, and he 
replied, "It suited him exactly that Hum- 
phreys was willing to take that position." 

On the 2d of August, when the heads of the 
order were summoned here by Dodd, to settle 
the time for the revolution, Mr. Humphreys 
was sent for. Harrison testifies that "Mr. 
Dodd informed me that he intended sending 
for Mr. Milligan, for Dr. Bowles, Mr. Hum- 
phreys, and Dr. Yeakle." He was still in the 
confidence of the leading and active men in 
the order, in September, 1864, the Deputy 
Grand Commander, Horace Heifren, address- 
ing an official letter to him, at that time, as a 
major-general of the order, to know whether 
the order should submit to Dodd's arrest or 
fight. He answers against fighting, and in 
favor of obedience to law, and takes occasion, 
then, to repudiate his nomination as major- 
general. This was at a time when the Chiefs 
of the order were under arrest, and their co- 
conspirators, all over the State, were trem- 
bling with apprehensions of arrest. The re- 
pudiation comes too late at that day, and with 
an ill grace. 

In regard to particular acts of disloyalty, 
the Government has proven, by a witness, 
whom the accused did not attempt to impeach, 
Elisha Cowgill, that on the 4th of June, 1863, 
Mr. Humphreys was, in "Sullivan county, at 
the head of an army of about 400 men." He 
Bays: 

"Humphreys talked about a great many 
things; about the President of the United 
States, and abused him to the whole crowd. 
He called him an old tyrant, who was usurp- 
ing a great deal of power, and wasting the 
treasure of the United States, and the lives 
of its citizens." 

The spirit of that armed mob, which was 
following a detachment of United States sol- 
diers, who had impressed a horse for the use 
of a sick soldier, as though they were enemies 
of their country, was also shown in their 
treatment of the officials of the Government. 
Mr. Cowgill, who was a Deputy United States 
Marshal, says: "Some said they ought to kill 
me before I got out of the crowd. Numbers 
of them swore that they would kill any man 
who should attempt to enroll Cass township. ' 

He also testifies that Mr. Humphreys mada 



a second speech, "and advised them t» go 
home and mind their own business. * * 
He also told them, 'Don't sleep too soundly.'" 

A few days after the enrolling officer of that 
township, after partly enrolling the township, 
was murdered in cold blood, and such was the 
intensity of the disloyalty of that neighbor- 
hood, or the strength of its secret organiza- 
tions, that a judicial investigation- failed to 
develop the name of the murderer or murder- 
ers. This was the state of society in which 
the Order of American Knights was organized, 
in 1863, under the auspices and with the co- 
operation of the accused, Andrew Humphreys. 

How he prepared for the extension of that 
order is shown by the testimony of Nicholas 
Cochrane, another witness for the Govern- 
ment. He states that he heard Mr. Humphreys 
speak, about the 5th of September, 1868, in 
Jackson township. "He criticised the Admin- 
istration tolerably strongly, * * and he 
seemed to think that the Democratic party was 
imposed upon, and ought to stand up for their 
rights. * * The time had come when Dem- 
ocrats should not appropriate their money, or 
be willing to spend their means in levity, but 
should be preparing for self-defense." 

At the same meeting a rebel, from Georgia, 
spoke, advising the audience "to resist the 
present Abolition Administration at the sacri- 
fice of their lives, their families, and them- 
selves, if necessary." 

Cheers were given for the rebel and for Mr. 
Humphreys. 

Mr. Humphreys called two witnesses, as to 
character for obedience to law. Wm. Wines 
testified to Humphreys having spoken in favor 
of the enforcement of the draft, and to his 
general reputation for loyalty. On cross- 
examination, he testified: 

"Some of my friends down there, of my 
principles, call him a 'Butternut,' a 'Copper- 
head,' and a 'traitor,' speaking of him polit- 
ically." 

William Johnson, sr., proved an unfortunate 
witness as to character. He testifies, that Mr. 
Humphreys' reputation as a law-abiding citi- 
zen "with that party he goes with, is good." 

In speaking of a speech, made by Mr. Hum- 
phreys, at Linton, in August, this witness 
states: "He spoke on the right of secession; 
on the right of a State to secede." 

In the cross-examination, I asked: 

"In the speech which you heard Mr. Hum- 
phreys make, did he argue in favor of the right 
of a State to secede ? 

"A. I so understood it. 

"Q. Did he say that secession was right? 

"A. Yes, sir." 

To learn his real status with the loyal men 
of Green county, I asked the witness to state 
"what his character for loyalty is among the 
men of unquestioned loyalty in the county 
where he lives." 

He answered: "It is not considered loyal." 

In the re-examination, the accused asked: 

"Whom do you consider loyal? 

"A. The men in favor of the prosecution of 
the war; I don't understand that any one else 
is loyal." 

From all the evidenco in ref«reac« to Andrew 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



291 



Humphreys, I am inclined to believe that he 
did not, like Dr. Bowles and Mr. Milligan, 
join this order for the purpose of using it, or 
assisting in it, to bring about a revolution and 
insurrection in these Northern States, but, 
like Mr. Bingham, more, perhaps, for political 
and personal ends. He used the order to place 
himself in some political position — to keep on 
the surface of the wave, that he might, in the 
ebb and flow of the tide, be placed upon some 
secure rock of public favor. But while ad- 
mitting this, we must insist that while his 
motives might have been less criminal than 
others in joining it, yet he did take upon him- 
self the responsibility of joining an unlawful, 
secret organization, treasonable in its intents 
and purposes, and that having taken upon 
himself this responsibility, having assisted in 
placing the Government in great danger of 
being destroyed by this great combination of 
treasonable elements, he should be held to a 
strict accountability for that act. The absence 
of the highest treasonable intent can only be 
considered in mitigation of the sentence. 
That he was a conspirator, this Commission 
must find, if the evidence shows that he be- 
longed to this organization, and if a conspir- 
ator, then he is guilty under four of the charges 
set cut against him. Personal considerations 
must not weigh with this Court in making up 
their findings and sentence. 

While we have human sympathy, we must 
rise above human frailty. There must be in- 
fused into the hearts of all of this Court a 
little spark of Divine justice. While weigh- 
ing in the balance the life of one man, his 
honor, and his liberty — all of which, I grant 
you, is as dear to him as yours is to you — we 
must remember that in the other scale is placed 
the life, liberty, and well-being of the mil- 
lions of this nation, and the perpetuity of 
those institutions that are to give to untold 
millions yet to come a Government that will 
secure to its people the highest privileges that 
citizens can claim, the maintainance of their 
inalienable rights, and the protection of their 
Hves and liberties. 

STEPHEN HORSEY. 

We come last to the accused, Stephen Hor- 
sey. To the address submitted by him, and 
drawn up by Mr. Gordon, I have simply to 
say, that no man is so poor, or so humble, 
that he can not be a traitor; and no man is so 
poor and humble but that he may be rich in 
all the glorious attributes of patriotism, loy- 
alty, and fealty to his Government. If a man 
becomes so poor, so low, so degraded, as to be 
a conspirator and traitor, let justice be meted 
out to him; for this is poverty that becomes a 
crime. 

My friend, Mr. Gordon, in drawing up this 
argument, fell into an error, I fully believe 
unintentionally, when he asserts that there is 
no proof that Horsey was ever a member of 
the Order of American Knights, or Sons of 
Liberty. The testimony in reference to Ste- 
phen flofsey, is briefly as follows: 

Wesley Tranter, a witness for the Govern- 
ment, testified that he joined the Circle of 
Honor, in May, 1863, at the solicitation of 



Stephen Horsey, and was initiated by Horsey. 
Horsey presided at a second meeting. In 
January, 1804, the Circle of Honor was changed 
to the Knights of the Golden Circle, as Tranter 
understood, but which Harrison Connell says: 
" I think they called it the American Knights." 

At a meeting held January 27th or 28th, 
1864, Stephen Horsey was present. Tranter 
states : " After we were in, Horsey made a lit- 
tle speech, and said we were to have some- 
thing different from the other. * * The 
oath differed from the former oath, but I can 
not recollect it; there was something about 
supporting Jeff Davis, North or South. In a 
speech that John AV. Stone made, there was 
something said about putting Governor Mor- 
ton out of the way." 

It was also stated that, " There was to be a 
raid made on this place (Indianapolis) about 
five days from the 1st of April. * * We 
were to arm ourselves and be ready. We were 
to take this place, and wear out the soldiers." 
"When we made the raid on this place, the 
members of the order in Illinois were to make 
a raid on Springfield, and those in Missouri 
on St. Louis. Washington was to be attacked, 
and Forrest was to make a dash into Ken- 
tucky." 

The question of arms was discussed, and 
Horsey spoke of Shirkliff and CofBn having 
taken ofi' a box of pistols five miles from the 
Shoals. Horsey "said there would be pistols 
taken round the country, and any one could 
have them at cost and carriage." 

Stephen Teney, another witness for the Gov- 
ernment, testifies that he joined the Circle of 
Honor at Horsey's solicitation, in the fall of 
1863. Teney states: "From what I saw and 
learned, we were to assist the South if called 
on." 

He says: "We drilled a few times in the 
township. I was told by one of my brothers, 
who was a member of the order, that they 
were getting arms all the time. * * * That 
they had three hundred pistols in that county." 

"Some four or five months since," Teney 
s(kys, " he (Horsey) told me they were getting 
along finely with their order." 

On cross-examination, Mr. Teney was asked: 

"Q. Who said you were to support the 
South? 

"A. Mr. Horsey. 

" Q. What was his language ? 

"A. He swore us to support JeflF Davis, 
North or South.' 

The testimony of Tranter and Teney was 
corroborated by Harrison Connell, who was 
present at the Gaddis House, where this se- 
cret order met, when Stone spoke. On cross- 
examination he was asked: "Whether or not, 
on that occasion, those that entered the oi'der, 
were sworn into the service of Jefi^ Davis?" 

"A. I think the man who initiated the men 
that night, made a speech to that eff"ect. * * 
I think he said they might consider themselves 
sworn into Jeflf Davis' army, and the men were 
very much dissatisfied with his speech." 

The accused, Stephen Horsey, is identified 
as one of the delegates to the State Council of 
June 14th. Mr. Harrison testifies: "A gen- 
tleman by the name of Stephen Horsey was 



292 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



present, but I do not know whether he (the 
accused) is the man or not; I do not recognize 
him; at all events he was a delegate from 
Martin county." Stidger identifies the ac- 
cused, Stephen Horsey, as present at the June 
Council, and states that when the case of 
CofiBn was discussed, "they asked him (Hor- 
sey) why he was so careless as to initiate 
such men as Coffin into the order?" 

Harrison Connell testifies that in the latter 
part of July or in August, 1864, "Mr. Horsey 
told me to meet him about a mile and a half 
from the Shoals, a certain evening, and we 
went a piece down the railroad, and we found 
some ammunition lying at the root of a tree; 
we put it in a sack and I carried it home." 
The ammunition consisted of "a keg of pow- 
der, a package of lead, and a package of 
caps." Mr. Connell says that we went with 
Horsey "according to promise *" * made 
the evening before." That he asked Hoi'sey 
about the ammunition "when we went back to 
the railroad. He told me there was some am- 
munition there he wanted me to take care of." 
Connell took care of it, by concealing it in his 
barn. 

Mr. HefiFren testifies that while confined in 
prison with Mr. Horsey, the latter admitted 
that he had ammunition concealed, and stated 
"where he hid his buckshot, caps and pow- 
der; some of it was hid in a manger, to feed 
horses, and in a barrel the caps were hid, and 
the horses eat from the top of the manger; 
and other portions were hid in a stable, and 
upon the plates in the corn-crib. Shirkliff 
carried off much of it, and the powder was 
hid in barrels in his house. 

"There were four hundred pounds of lead, 
and several thousand musket caps; I think 
some six or seven kegs of powder." 

Horsey also "told where the money came 
from that they got it with. * * From Dr. 
Bowles." 

I desire to call the attention of the Court 
for a moment to the kind of evidence sub- 
mitted on behalf of the Government in these 
cases. Much has been said by the counsel for 
the accused, in the attempt to bring into disre- 
pute the witnesses for the Government, styling 
them generally as spies, detectives, and in- 
formers. Out of the twenty-eight witnesses 
introduced by the Government, there were just 
two who were, as the counsel styles them, spies 
or detectives. These were Stidger and Zumro. 
All the other witnesses stood in exactly the 
same relation to the case as the witnesses in- 
troduced by the defense, some of them being 
members of the order, some had been arrested 
and released. Why they should be followed 
'by such malignity, hatred, and abuse, I can 
not conceive. It is not pretended that they 
swore falsely, or from malice, or hope of re- 
ward. They told simply what they were com- 
pelled to tell — the truth, and the whole truth, 
and this, perhaps, is why they hate them. 

In using the word " informers," it would 
seem, the counsel have overlooked the meaning 
of the term. Burrill's Laiv Dictionary defines 
an "informer" as "one who informs against 
another for the violation of some penal statute; 
one who gives information upon which another 



may prosecute for the violation of some penal 
statute." These men who have been called by 
the Government, gave no information upon 
which the accused were prosecuted, and only 
when the cases came up for trial, did they tes- 
tify, as they were forced to do. And even 
had they been informers, within the meaning 
of the law, will the gentlemen show me what 
crime it is for a man to so love his country, 
and so earnestly desire its peace and security 
as to endeavor to bring to justice criminals 
who were seeking the lives of their fellow men, 
and the destruction of their Government? 
Rather would not the counsel have stood in a 
more enviable light had they stood by and en- 
couraged, by giving the just meed of praise 
to those who have had the courage and manliness 
to stand by their Government, and who have 
done their part in bringing to just punish- 
ment those who have sought to destroy it. 
Think for a moment of the position in which 
the Government was placed, and consider the 
difficulties and almost insurmountable obsta- 
cles to be overcome in getting at the secrets of 
this organization, bound together, as this was, 
by the most solemn and binding of oaths, or 
get witnesses to publish the secrets of this or- 
ganization, when they who did so, periled 
their lives in the act. By what means, gentle- 
men, could we have developed these facts in a 
better manner than we have? We have given 
you the evidence of men who went into the 
organization for the purpose of revealing their 
designs ; we have added to them those who 
were among you and of you, and thus out of 
your own mouths we have made the proof 
against you. 

Finally, may it please the Court, it is for you 
to consider whether the evidence supports the 
charges and specifications. That is a matter 
about which I can give you no opinion. I can 
only say that if it is proven to your satisfaction 
that the accused, all of them, or one of them, 
did join this treasonable Order of American 
Knights or Sons of Liberty, did assent to the 
principles of the first degree — and all third de- 
gree members must have so assented — and the 
obligation of that first degree, they are, in con- 
templation of law, conspirators per se; if con- 
spirators per se, then, guilty of the first charge, 
and the first three specifications. The fourth 
specification under that charge, simply sets 
out the means by which this order proposed 
to carry out these unlawful designs. 

Charge second, affording aid and comfort to 
the rebels against the authority of the United 
States, will be supported if it has been proven 
thattliese parties joined themselves to a secret, 
unlawful organization, whose general princi- 
ples and purposes were adverse to the Govern- 
ment, and in sympathy and general co-opera- 
tion with the purposes and principles of the rebel 
insurgents. The tliree specifications under 
that charge simply set out the means, or man- 
ner, by which this aid and comfort to rebels 
was to be given; whether the proof supports 
these specifications, is alone for you to de- 
termine. 

Charge third, inciting insurrection, and the 
two specifications under it, will be supported, 
if it has been proven to you that by public 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



293 



addresses, by organizing certain societies, and 
disseminating certain doctrines, the tendencies 
of which were to embitter and arouse the peo- 
ple to open hostility to the Government. If 
these parties, or any members of this conspir- 
acy to which they joined themselves, while 
carrying out the general purposes of the con- 
spiracy, did do any acts, disseminate any sen- 
timents, make incendiary speeches, attempt to 
arm, or do any thing the tendency of which 
was to create open revolt, or an effort on the 
part of the people, by unlawful means, to 
change their Government, and set aside by 
force any parts of the Government, then charge 
third and its specifications are supported. 

Charge fourth, disloyal practices, and the 
five specifications under it, set out substan- 
tially, that these accused did join themselves 
to a secret, unlawful society or order, known 
as the Order of American Knights, and did, 
through, and by means of this unlawful com- 
bination or order, disseminate principles ad- 
verse to the Government of the United States, 
and did counsel and advise citizens of the 
United States to disregard the authority of the 
United States, to resist a call, or draft, de- 
signed to increase her armies, and did arm 
certain citizens of the United States with the 
intent of resisting said Government; and did 
attempt to arm, and did arm certain members 
of this unlawful order, for the purpose of 
carrying out these unlawful designs; and 
that these parties did accept and hold offices 
in the military forces, for the State of Indi- 
ana, in this unlawful, secret society, or order; 
that said offices and military officers were un- 
known to the Constitution and Laws of the 
United States. Whether the proof has so 
connected the accused with this order, with its 
treasonable purposes and designs, or not, with 
its efforts to break down and unlawfully set 
aside the Government, is for you to determine. 

Charge fifth, violation of the laws of war, 
and its two specifications, charge simply that 
the accused, while pretending to be loyal, 
peaceable citizens of the United States, did 
attempt to introduce enemies of the United 
States into the loyal States, and did thereby 
violate their allegiance as citizens of said 
Government; that they did attempt to do this 
through a certain secret, unlawful combina- 
tion, or order. Whether the pi'oof supporting 
these allegations has been made, is a matter 
for you to determine. 

Then, gentlemen of the Commission, in con- 
clusion, permit me to say, that you have, in 
your hands, the keeping of the dearest rights; 
in fact, all the rights and privileges of these 
four men, the accused — that their rights are as 
eacred and dear to them as are yours to you; 
that they are possessed of the same attach- 
ment to life, its hopes, its fears, its affections, 
its aspirations, as yourselves; I charge you, 
therefore, if, in any particular, the evidence 
has failed to support these charges, or failed 
to convict these men of these high crimes — 
the highest crimes known to the law — be proud 
to acquit them; send them forth to the world, 
into the broad light of day, free from guilt, 
untarnished with even the stain of reproach; 



let your verdict be not only an acquittal, if 
these charges are unsustained, but let your 
action go further, and be a triumphant vindi- 
cation of their characters. 

On the other hand, if the proof does sustain 
these charges, if these men are guilty, do your 
duty. Display the manhood and the bravery 
that I know you all possess; hold down the 
natural affections and pity of your natures 
for the men whom you try, and remember only 
your high duty to your country — to the gener- 
ations that shall live after you. Remember 
that each day this war is waged in this coun- 
try, not four lives, not four hundred, but thou- 
sands of patriots must perish, to each one of 
whose names there is clinging a glorious his- 
tory; a histoi-y of toil, of self-sacrifice, of 
endurance, of patience and long suffering, 
of unselfisli courage and devotion to their 
country; think that each day these struggles 
are prolonged must go down hundreds of these 
brave men. If you make an example of these 
men who are prolonging these struggles, you 
are shortening this desolating contest, and 
saving the lives of true men. The sacrifice 
of bad men, of conspirators and traitors, those 
men that sustain the armed rebellion, that 
give its cause strength, active sympathy, and 
encouragement — their sacrifice, I say, saves 
the good, the true, and the noble of the na- 
tion. It is not mercy in you to sit here and 
acquit the guilty. It is cruelty to the scarred 
veterans, to the long-suffering patriots, who 
are fighting your battles. It is cruelty to their 
lonely wives, who sit with aching hearts and 
with throbbing pulse, clasping their little ones 
to their hearts, not knowing what moment the 
knock at their door shall be the death-knell at 
their hearts. Your sympathy for traitors and 
treason makes orphans, makes misery in this 
land every-where. It makes desolate, and 
lonely, and sad, the pure, the good, and the 
true. Therefore, remember that justice in 
your place is mercy. Nerve your hearts to 
do fearlessly your duty, let that duty come in 
what shape it may: sink the frailties of the 
man, and rise up, grasping a few of the attri- 
butes of Omniscience. 

Remember, I charge you, that every fiber of 
this nation is quivering, is strained to its ut- 
most tension, to secure for her people, and for 
the generations to come, those rights which 
will give to her people the highest development 
which mankind can achieve. Remember that 
while the Revolution gave your nation birth, 
that from that bloody struggle was achieved 
national existence, through this second bloody 
struggle, through this second baptism of fire 
and sword, she is to achieve immortality. 
Failing in this struggle, her light goes out in 
darkness, and with it the hopes, the aspira- 
tions, the rights of thirty millions of people. 
Remember, in this great hour, so to do your 
duty, that when the Commander-in-Chief of 
the Universe shall sound the last great reveille, 
and call from their last, long sleep the unnum- 
bered hosts of the earth, you can point to thia 
day's work as having been well done. 

Gentlemen, I have done. 



OF THE 

INITIAL LETTERS USED IN THE RITUALS. 



O. A. K. 



K. L.— -Knight Lecturer. 
AV. 0. C— Warden of the Outer Court. 
K. C. — Knight Conductor. 
N. — Neophite. 
A. B. — Ancient Brother. 
K. G. N. — Knight Guardian North. 
K. G. S. — Knight Guardian South. 
G. S. — Grand Seignior. 
The above belongs to the First Degree of the 
Order of American Knights. 



E. K. 
West. 



C. W. — Excellent Knight Commander 



E. K.— Excellent Knight. 

E. K. G. C. — Excellent Knight Grand Com- 
mander. 

0. A. K. — Order of American Knights. 

The above belongs to the Second Degree of 
the Order of American Knights. 

M. E. K.— Most Excellent Knight. 

M. E. D. 0. A. K.— Most Excellent Degree of 
the 0. A. K. 

M. E. G. C— Most Excellent Grand Com- 
mander. 



O. S. L. 



VESTIBULE, OR SON OF LIBERTY LESSON. 

v.— Vestibule. 

W. 0. C— Warden Outer Court. 

L. V. — Lecturer of the Vestibule. 

0. C— Outer Court, 

T.— Temple. 

FIRST DEGREE. 

0. S. L. — Order of the Sons of Liberty. 
C. T.— Conductor of the Temple. 
W.— Warden. 

A. B. — Ancient Brother, (second officer of 
First Degree). 

A. S. L. — A Son of Liberty. 

0.— Order. 

F. G. N.— Fellow Guardian North. 

F. G. S.— Fellow Guardian South. 

G. S. — Grand Seignior, (first officer of First 
Degi'ee). 

F. 0. S. L.— Fellow in the Order of the Sons 
of Liberty. " 

SECOND DEGREE, OR FIRST CONCLAVE DEGREE. 

K. 0. S. L. — Knight Order Sons of Liberty. 
K. C. — Knight Conductor. 
K. C. W. — Knight Commander West, (second 
officer). 

1. T.— Inner Temple. 

C. C. — Commander Conclave. 
T. D.— Temple Degree. 

G. C. — Grand Council. 
S. C. — Supreme Council. 



K. C. C. — Knight Commander Conclave. 
I. T. of 0.— Inner Temple of the Order. 

THIRD DEGREE, OB SECOND CONCLAVE DEGREE. 

M. E. K. 0. S. L.— Most Excellent Knight 
Order of the Sons of Liberty. 

M. E. K. C. W.— Most Excellent Knight Com- 
mander West. 

K. C. — Knight Conductor. 

M. E. K's. — Most Excellent Knights. 

M. E. K. 0. S. L.— Most Excellent Knights 
Order of the Sons of Liberty. 

M. E. G. C— Most Excellent Grand Com- 
mander. 

I — t T. — Innermost Temple. 

C. — Conclave. 

G. C. S.— Grand Council of the State. 

S. C. 0. S. L. — Supreme Council Order Sons 
of Liberty. 

K. C. C. — Knight Commander Conclave. 

CONSTITUTION STATE COUNCIL. 

G. C. — Grand Council. 
G. C. — Grand Commander. 
Dep. G. C. — Deputy Grand Commander. 
G. C. S. S. C. — Grand Counselor S. Supremo 
Council. 
S. G. C. — Supreme Grand Council. 

CONSTITUTION OF THE SUPREME COUNCIL. 

S. G. C. — Supreme Grand Council. 

296 



RITUAL OF THE KNIGHTS OF THE GOLDEN CIRCLE. 



GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT C. 



V. 



W. O. C. Gives * * * 

K L. Who Cometh ? Who cometh ? Who 
Cometh ? 

W. 0. C. A man ! We found him in th>e 
dark ways of the sons of folly, bound in 
chains, and well nigh crushed to death be- 
neath the iron heel of the oppressor. We 
have brought him hither, and would fain 
clothe him in the white robes of Virtue, 
and place his feet in the straight and nar- 
row path which leads to Truth and Wisdom. 

K. L. Brothers ! The purpose ye have de- 
clared touching this stranger is most wor- 
thy; let him advance to our altar by the 
regular steps ; instruct him in our chosen, 
solejrm attitude, and let him give testimony 
of that which is in him. 

K. L. Divine Essence ! God of our Fath- 
ers, whose inspiration moved -them to 
mighty deeds of valor in the cause of Eter- 
nal Truth, Justice and Human Rights. We, 
their sons, would fain recognize the same 
presence and inspiration in this V. of the 
T., conseci'ated to the principles which they 
inculcated by precept and by example, and 
defended with their lives and their sacred 
honor. With the Divine Presence let holi- 
est memories come, like incense to our 
souls, and exalt them with emotions worthy 
of the ceremonies of the Supreme occasion. 
Amen ! 

Man! Thou art now in the V., and, if 
found worthy, will hence be ushered into 
the consecrated T., where Truth dwells 
amid her votaries; let thy soul be duly con- 
scious of her presence, and go forth in ex- 
alted desire for her divine influence. Within 
those sacred precincts, reverence toward the 
Supreme Being, Patriotism, Love, Charity 
and good fellowship are inculcated and 
cherished. Infidelity to God or our country, 
nor hatred, nor malice, nor uncharitable- 
ness, nor their kindred vices, must enter 
there. " Love one another," is the hail of 
the order into whose inner circle thou 
wouldst fain be inducted. Direct thy 
thoughts within, at this supreme moment, 
Bnd declare, as thou wouldst answer to a 



good conscience, is thy soul pure and fitted 
for the indwelling of Truth ? 

Answer, "yes," or "no." 

Is thy heart quickened with genial emo- 
tions toward thy fellow man ? 

Answer, "yes," or "no." 

It is well. If thou hast not answered 
truly, in obedience to the promptings of thy 
holier nature, so shalt thou be judged in the 
last day, when the secrets of thy heart shall 
be revealed, and the actions and purposes 
of thy life on earth shall return to thy soul 
their fruits of bitterness or joy eternal. I 
charge thee, if thou art impelled hither- 
ward by curiosity; if thou cherish other 
purposes, in this regard, than the highest and 
the holiest which thy heart can conceive, it 
were better for thee that thy feet had never 
passed the threshold of our outer court. 
Our faithful and beloved brothers, who have 
conducted thee hither into this presence, 
are thy sponsors. A feai'ful responsibility 
is upon them ! If thou should falsify their 
assurances to us, betray their trust, or stain 
thy manhood by unworthy actions, it will 
be their painful duty to publish thy shame, 
so that thou art expelled, and ever after ex- 
cluded from the society of honorable men. 

Brothers, explain your obligations as spon- 
sors for the candidate. 

OBLIGATION OP THE SPONSORS. 

" We do solemnly promise and under- 
take, amidst the inspiring associations of our 
sacred V., that the stranger whom we have 
introduced into this presence, shall in all 
things prove himself a true man. That 
from his daily walk and conversation with 
liis fellows, we guarantee his worthiness to 
be inducted into the sublime mysteries of 
our beloved order. We do further promise 
and undertake for him, that he shall faith- 
fully keep secret whatsoever shall transpire 
in this presence. We do further promise, 
that if he shall be found worthy thereto, 
and shall be advanced to the inner T. of our 
order, that he shall reveal nothing which 
shall therein be made known to him to be 

297 



298 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



preserved an inviolate secret. "VVe do fur- 
ther promise that, in case he shall betray 
the confidence which he has inspired in us, 
we will hold it our bounden dutj' to see that 
he is expelled from the association of all 
honorable men. This we do promise with 
the approbation of the Divine Spirit. 
^. men ! 

Hast thou heard and considered the 
words, promises and obligations of thy spon- 
sors? 

Answer, "Aye." 

Wilt thou, imploring aid from the Divin- 
ity within thee, perform unto the end that 
which they have prpmised in thy behalf? 

Answer, " I will." 

It is well ! God help thee unto the end ! 

It is now my duty to explain the princi- 
ples which our order inculcates, holding 
them for sublime and eternal truths, and 
which we, as an organized fraternity, and as 
individuals, aim to illustrate in our hves 
and conversations, as well in our intercourse 
with men as in our sacred conclave. Listen 
to the words of wisdom, and let them sink 
deep into thy heart. 

DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES. 

1st. Essence, Ethereal, Eternal, Supreme — 
by us called God! hath created, pei-vades 
and controls the Universe! dwells in man, 
and is the Divinity within him ! 

Sponsors. " Amen." 

2d. All men are endowed by the Creator 
with certain rights — equal only so far as 
there is equality in the coipacity for the ap- 
preciation, enjoyment and exercise of those 
rights — some of which are inalienable, while 
others may, by voluntary act, or consent, be 
qualified, suspended or relinquished, for the 
purpose of social governmental organiza- 
tions, or may be taken away from the in- 
dividual by the supremacy of the law which 
he himself has ordained, in conjunction 
with his fellows, for their mutual protection 
and advancement toward perfect civiliza- 
tion. 

3d. Government arises from the necessi- 
ties of well-organized society. 

4th. Iliglit government derives its sole 
authority i'rom the will of the governed, 
expressly declared. 

[The majority should express such will, in the 
mode which the unanimous voice shall approve ; 
always guaranteeing to each individual, unless he 
shall have been restrained by the law, the privilege 
and opportunity to make knotvn his opinions and 
express his will in regard to all matters relating or 
pertaining to the government.^ 

5th. The grand purpose of the govern- 
ment is the welfare of the governed ; its 
success is measured by the degree of pro- 
gress which the people shall have attained 
toward the most exalted civilization. 

6th. Government founded upon the prin- 
ciples enunciated in the foregoing proposi- 
tions, is designated "Democracy." [The divi- 



sion of Territory where it exists, is called, usually, 
a " Republic," sometimes a '' State."] 

7th. Reflection, observation and expe- 
rience, seem to have established in the 
minds of wise and impartial men, the con- 
clusion that "^Democracy" properly organized 
upon the great principles which our Revolu- 
tionary ancestors — patriots and sages — held, 
inculcated and defended, best achieves the 
grand and benificent ends of human gov- 
ernment. 

8th. The Government organized and ex 
isting in the original Thirteen States of 
North America, when they had severally 
and unitedly renounced their allegiance to 
the Government of Great Britain, and dis- 
solved their former colonial relations, we 
regard as the wisest, and best adapted to 
the nature and character of the people in- 
habiting the Continent of North America 
at the present day ! Under the benign in- 
fluences of that Government, a nation has 
arisen and attained a degree of power and 
splendor, which has no parallel in the his- 
tory of the human race. 

9th. The Government designated " the 
United States of America," which shaU 
blazon the historic page, and shed its light 
along the path of future ages, was the tran- 
scendent conception and mighty achieve- 
ment of wisdom, enlightened patriotism, 
and virtue, which appear to have passed 
from earth amidst the fading glories of the 
Golden Era, which they illustrated with im- 
mortal splendor. That Government was 
created originally by thirteen free, sovereign, and 
independent States, for their mutual benefit, 
to administer the affairs of their common 
interests and concerns; being endowed 
with the powers, dignity, and supremacy, 
and no further or other, which are distinctly 
specified and warranted, and conferred by 
the strict letter of the immortal compact, 
"The Constitution of the United States." 

Sponsors — Amen ! 

Man ! under the influence of sublime 
Truth ! amid the inspiration of the Divine 
Presence ! which thou didst invoke on thy 
approach to this Altar, how wilt thou re- 
spond to the declarations which thou hast 
just heard ? 

Answer as to thy conscience, aye I or no ! 
for so it will be recorded. 

Amen I 

Place thyself in the solemn attitude of 
invocation which thou didst first assume 
before this Altar, and repeat after me: 

I , fullj'^ comprehending and 

appreciating the Declaration of Principles 
which I have just heard pronounced, hold 
them for truth — to cherish them in my 
ln'art of hearts — to inculcate them amongst 
my fellow men — to illustrate them, as far 
as in me lies, in my daily walk and conver- 
sation, and, if needs be, will defend them 
with my life. I appeal to tnat Divine Es- 
sence which created and rules the Universe, 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS 



299 



and dwells in me, to witness the sincerity 
of my vows. I do solemnly promise, that, 
should I, from my own volition, or from 
adjudged unworthiness, advance no further 
than this V. of the T., consecrated to the 
rites and mysteries of the brotherhood, to 
which I purpose to be inducted, I will never 
reveal, or make known, to any person or 
persons, by sign or signs, word or words, 
nor any other manner, the ceremonies in 
which I have just taken part, nor the 
names nor persons of those who have parti- 
cipated with me, nor any part, nor any one 
of them, nor any single word nor thing, 
which I have heard, or have seen herein ; 
nor any purpose which I have learned or 
conjectured as the leading purpose of the 
brotherhood whose Inner Temple I desire to 
enter. To the faithful performance of all 
which, in presence of these witnesses, my 
worthy Sponsors, I pledge my most sacred 
honor ! Amen ! 

Friend ! Thou art well and truly informed 
touching the grand principles of an order, 
whose highest purpose is to teach, cherish, 
and inculcate those principles by precept 
and by example, and to defend them where- 
soever assailed ; whose other purpose is to 
love and cherish one another, and to relieve 
the worthy in their distress, giving our first 
care to our own brother, and to those who 
are nearest and dearest to him. Eemem- 
ber, that as a fi'aternity, we inculcate 
neither sectarianism or partisanism, only 
demanding unity in sentiment touching 
immutable principles. 

{Here endeth the lesson of the V.) 

{Instruct in the sign.) 

Dost thou now sincerely desire to ad- 
vance, or shall our worthy brothers conduct 
thee to the place where thou last saw the 
light of heaven, and return thee again to 
the path from which thy feet have been so 
lately turned aside ? Listen to the words 
of thy Sponsors. 

Sponsors. I would advance onward and 
upward, even to the Temple where Truth 
dwells serenely. I would fain worship at 
her shrine through all of life to me on 
earth. 

Friend ! Sayest thou so ? 

Answer. " Aye." 

So be it. Thou shalt advance ! 

Thy Sponsors will deliver thee to the W. 
of the T., who will conduct thee to the Most 
Ancient and the Sages, who will instruct 
thee in wisdom, and will give unto thee a 
new name. 

May not their words fall upon ears which 
can not hear ! Nor their hands fall upon a 
head that will not learn ! 

Thou wilt now pass to the sacred pre- 
cincts, where thou shalt be hailed brother ! 
See that thou return hither a wiser and a 
better man ! 

Conduct our Xeophyte to the Most An- 
cient and our Sages. See to it that ye make 



his pathway smooth. Let the air be redo- 
lent with incense, and let it breathe sweet- 
est music upon his ear, so that the pursuit 
of knowledge shall be to him a continual 
joy and inspiration. 

I. 

W. 0. C. Gives * * * 

K. C. Who Cometh? Whocometh? Who 
cometh ? 

W. A N., whom our worthy brother L., 
of the v., commanded us to deliver to the 
C. of the T. He is from the outer dark- 
ness, and would journey east for light and 
instruction. 

K. C. He should have received his first 
lesson in the V. I would be assured of his 
proficiency. 

Let the N. advance the signs in which he 
has been instructed. 

K. C. 'Tis well. I will conduct thee to 
the A. B. 

A. B. Who cometh? Who cometh? Who 
cometh ? 

K. C. AN., whom our worthy brother W. 
has brought hither by command of our 
worthy L. of the V. I have proved him, 
and found him duly proficient in the 
lesson he has received. He lain would 
journey east for instruction. 

A. B. His desire shall be gratified. But it 
is my duty to admonish him touching the 
trials and perils he needs must encounter, 
and to demand of him a solemn obligation, 
first giving him assurance that such obliga- 
tion requires of him nothing inconsistent 
with his duty to God! to his country ! to his 
family ! or to himself N., with this assu- 
rance, are you now willing to take such an 
obligation? 

N. I am. 

A. B. Then place yourself in the attitude 
in which you plighted your solemn vows in 
the v., holding in your right hand the sa- 
cred emblem of our order. 



OBLIGATION OF THE N. 



L 



, in the presence of God \ 

and many witnesses, do solemnly declare, 
that I do herein, freely, and in the light of 
a good conscience, renew the solemn vows 
which I plighted in the V. I do further 
promise that I will never reveal, nor make 
known, to any man, woman or child, any 
thing which my eyes may behold, or any 
word which my ears may hear, within this 
sacred T., nor in any other T., nor in any 
other place where the brotherhood may be 
assembled. That I will never speak of, nor 
intimate any purpose or purposes of this 
order, whether contemplated or determined, 
to any one except to a brother of this or- 
der, vvhom I know to be such. That I will 
never exhibit any or either of the emblems 
or insignia of the order, except by express 
authority granted to that end, and that I 



800 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



will never explain their use or signification 
to any one not a brother of this order, 
\yhom I know to be such, under any pre- 
tense whatsoever, neither by persuasion nor 
by coercion. That I will never reveal nor 
make known, to any man, woman or child, 
any or either of the signs, hails, passwords, 
watchwords, initials nor initial letters belong- 
ing to this order, neither by voice, nor by 
gesture, attitude or motion of the body, nor 
any member of the body; nor by intima- 
tion through the instrumentality of any 
thing animate or inanimate, or object in the 
heavens, or on the earth, oi- above the earth, 
except to prove a man if he be a brother, 
or to communicate with a brother whom I 
shall have first duly proved or know to be 
such. That I will never pronounce the 
name of this order in the hearing of any 
man, woman or child, except to a brother 
of this order, whom I know to be such. 
That I will ever have in my most holy keep- 
ing each and every secret of this order, 
which may be confided to me by a brother, 
either within or without the T., and rather 
than reveal which, I will consent to any 
saci'ifice, even unto de.ath by torture. I do fur- 
ther promise that I will never recommend for 
membership to this order any man who is 
not a citizen of an American State, except 
by dispensation to that end, by the compe- 
tent authority of the order — citizenship al- 
ways resulting from nativity, or from due pro- 
cess of law in such case provided — neither 
any person who has not attained the age of 
twenty-one years ; neither a man unsound or 
infirm in body or in mind — such as a crijD- 
j)le or an idiot ; neither any one of African 
descent, whether slave or freeman ; neither 
an avowed and acknowledged atheist; 
neither a person of bad repute. That I 
will ever cherish toward each and every 
member of this order, fraternal regard and 
fellowship; that I will ever aid a worthy 
brother in distress, if in my power to do 
so; that I will never do wrong, knowingly, 
to a brother, nor permit him to sutler 
wrong at the hand of another, if it shall be 
in my power to warn him of danger or pre- 
vent the wrong. I do further promise that 
I will, at all times, if needs be, take up 
arms in the cause of the op23ressed — in my 
country first of all — against any Monarch, 
Prince, Potentate, Power or Government 
usurped, which may be found in arms, and 
waging war against a people or peoples, who 
are endeavoring to establish, or liave inau- 
gurated, a Government for themselves of 
their own free choice, in accordance with, 
and founded upon, the eternal principles of 
Truth ! which I have sworn in the V., and 
now in this prosence do swear, to maintain 
inviolate, and defend with my life. This I 
do promise, without reservation or evasion 
of mind ; without regard to the name, sta- ; 
tion, condition or destination of the invad- ; 
ing or coercion jjower, whether it shall r.rise ' 



within or come from without ! I do further 
promise that I will always recognize and 
respond to the hail of a brother, when it 
shall be made in accordance with the in- 
structions and injunctions of the order, and 
not otherwise. 1 do further promise that, 
with God's helj), I will ever demean myself 
toward my fellow man, and especially to- 
ward the brotherhood, as becometh a ii-^ie 
man. 1 do further promise that, should I 
cease to be a member of this order, either 
of my own volition or by expulsion, I will 
hold and preserve inviolate my solemn 
vows and promises herein declared, as well 
as while 1 am in full fellowship. All this I 
do solemnly promise and swear sacredly to 
observe, perform and keep, with a full 
knowledge and understanding, and with 
my full assent, that the penalty which will 
follow a violation of any or either of these, 
my solemn vows, will be a shameful death ! 
while my name shall be consigned to in- 
famy, while this sublime order shall survive 
the wrecks of time, and even until the last 
faithful brother shall have passed from 
earth to his service in the Tenii^le not made 
with hands ! Divine Essence ! and ye men 
of Earth ! witness the sincerity of my soul 
touching these, my vows I 
Amen 1 



A. B. Neophyte, thy progress from the 
outer darkness to this presence, and thy 
proficiency in the sublime lessons, which have 
been given thee to learn, gives assurance that 
there is one more votary to eternal Truth, 
rescued from the throng which wear the 
galling chains of Error. Thy journey is 
well nigh accomplished. Fain would 1 tell 
thee that thy trials are passed, but it is 
not so ; yet, I will give thee such cavition 
and admonition as will serve thee much. 
The Sons of Folly will beset thy path, and 
aim to turn thee back to thy dark haunts; 
will scott* and buti'et thee; peradventure, 
will seek thy life. Then put thy trust in 
God and Truth. Still, thy journey leadeth 
due East, until thou art liailed by the G. 8., 
who will further instruct thee, welcome thee, 
brother, in our Inner Court, and give unto 
thee a new name. Beware, lest thou bear 
thee toward the North too far, and lose thy 
way, and perish amid the moaning pines, 
which crown the rugged hills, sighing ever 
in rough harmony to the icy blasts, or amid 
the hoary, moss-clad rocks, whose yawning 
chasms open wide and bottomless to the 
hapless wanderer. As well take heed, lest 
the balmy zephyrs from the golden South 
entice thee too far thither. There the 
gentle winds will cool thy fevered temples, 
and awake thy senses in delirious joy; yet 
they bear too oft the deadly malaria, and 
minister to death in his awful revelry. We 
have a trusty Brother Guardian on either 
side thv wav, who, true and constant at 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



501 



their posts, pei'cli.ince may hail thee, when 
thou wilt tany, should he bid thee, receive 
what he shall ofter, and give thy earnest 
heed to all his words. Remember, the only 
path which leads where Truth and Wisdom 
dwells together, their fairest sister. Vir- 
tue, traced. It leadeth onward, upward, 
sti'aight. It is paved with gems, and pearls, 
and gold. It is bordered with perennial 
flowers, whose perfumes all thy senses en- 
trance. Neophyte, be thy watchword — On- 
ward! Onward! Onward! 



K. G. N. Who Cometh ? who cometh? who 
cometh ? Advance ! 

K. C. A N., by command of our A. B. 
in the West, journeying toward the East to 
receive light and instruction. 

K. G. N. Then he has left the straight 
path, and has lost his way. Danger is in 
every step he advances. I am from the far 
North not long since. The barren wastes 
are white with the bleaching bones of such 
as he, and the yawning chasms send up an 
horrid stench from Death's late carnival I 
Bid him turn back. He has forgotten the 
instrictions of our A. B. Was he not 
charged to follow the straight and narrow 
path which Virtue has traced ? 

K. C. True ! We entered upon the 
straight path, but ere we had proceeded far, 
the Sons of Folly beset us, and drove us 
from our course with violence. We were 
sorely bruised. We were bewildered, and 
lost our way. Wilt thou direct us hence ? 

K. G. N. I will; but first I must prove 
him, that I may know by what right he 
claims my care and assistance. 

K. C. Lo ! He hath a sign. 

K. G. N. 'Tis well. Hath he a password? 

K. C. He has ; and will give it. 

K. G. N. 'Tis well. Thy watchword? 

N. Onward! Onward! Onward! 

K. G. N. 'Tis well. Tarry and refresh 
thyselves ; then depart due South. Shouldst 
thou cross the path thou seekest, and reach 
the camp of our G. in the Southj he will 
further instruct thee. Thy watchword still — 
Onward ! Onward ! Onward ! 



K. G. S. Who cometh ? Who cometh ? 
Who cometh ? Strangers, advance. De- 
clare thy way and purpose. 

K. C. I come with this N. from our 
worthy A B. in the West, who commanded 
us to journey due East to the M. E. G. S. 
and the Sages for light and instruction. He 
charged us to follow the straight path. We 
had not journeyed far, when we were beset 
by the Factionists, Fanatics, and Sons of 
EiTor and Folly, who did wound and bruise 
us sorely, because we would not turn back 
with them to their dark and devious ways. 
In brief, we lost our path, and would have 
perished amid the snows of the icy North, 



or svmk into the yawning chasms of the 
rocks, but that the worthy K. G. N. did hail 
us as we passed his tent, and gave us wine 
and bread, instructed us in wisdom, and 
turned our faces hitherward. Wilt thou 
show us our path ? 

K. G. S. I will. But first I would prove 
thy friend. I know thee well for a true 
man. Let the Neophyte advance the sign. 

K. G. S. 'Tis well. Hath he a password? 

K. C. He has. 

K. G. S. Bid him give it me. 

'Tis well. Thy watchword ? 

N. Onward ! Onward ! Onward ! 

K. G. S. 'Tis well. Tarry and refresh 
yourselves, and I will instruct you further. 
Happily, thou didst approach my tent, else 
thou and thy friend might have perished 
together in the trackless fen, or perchance 
thy limbs had wearied, and thy heart be- 
come faint in thy weary way under the 
scorching rays of the meridian sun ; or in- 
haled the rank poison, which, distilled in 
the cool air of night, swathes the heated 
brow in the death camp, which no tender 
hand can wipe away ; or, peradventure, the 
soft gales, laden with perfume, and breath- 
ing the syren's entrancing melody, had 
lulled thy soul to rest in inglorious ease to 
destruction. Not yet is thy Neophyte fitted 
for the field of labor. His soul must be 
attuned to the harmony of great thoughts, 
to the conception and achievement of 
mighty deeds and purposes. Our bj'others 
there are doing battle in the cause of eter- 
nal Truth. They have no place for Neo- 
phytes. When he shall have reached our 
sacred T., whose spires are glistening in the 
dawning rays of "Truth's resplendent sun ; 
when he shall have drunk deep from the 
fountains of Wisdom, which send forth 
their streams to cherish And gladden noble 
manhood, then shall he don our sacred 
armor, rush to the deadly breach where 
faction's darling hosts are gathered, and 
waiving aloft our holy banner, consecrated 
to Freedom, Truth and Virtue, shall bear it 
on to victory, or die beneath its folds. Con- 
duct him again to the straight and narrow 
path, thence onward due East to our G. S., 
and the Sages of the T. Cheer his heart; 
beguile his way with tales of daring deeds. 
Let the watchword be ever and ever — On- 
ward ! Onward ! Onward ! 



K. C. We have attained the end of our 

journey. The W s of the Eastern 

Tower have sounded the alarm. Assume 
the attitude in which thou wert instructed 
in the V. Fall upon thy knee, in the pos- 
ture which best expresses humiliation. He 
that humbleth himself shall be exalted. 
Thou shalt rise again to welcome the glad 
light which glows resplendent around our 
holy place, w^here Truth, Virtue, Wisdom, 
dwell together, and their altars ever burn 



302 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



with the incense-offerings of their vota- 
ries. 

{Kneels upon his left knee.) 

G. S. Who Cometh? Who cometh? 
Who cometh ? 

K. C. M. E. G. S., I have brought a N. 
He is from the West, and hath journeyed 
East for instruction in Truth and Wisdom. 
He is a man. 

G. S. A man ! say est thou ? Me thinks 
that posture becometh not a man formed 
in the image of his Creator. It doth imply 
debasemen t — servitude. 

K. C. Servitude, M. E. G. S., but not de 
basement. Two brothers of our sacred 
order found him bound in chains, and upon 
his neck a heavy yoke. Our worthy 
brothers, as is their wont, did break his 
fetters, cast away his galling yoke, and 
brought him to our V., where he proved 
himself a true man. So did our A. B. prove 
him, and gave to him our sacred watch- 
word. So did our worthy G s N. and S, 

prove him by our signs, and by his pro- 
ficiency in the lessons of our order. Still, 
M. E. G. S., he serveth. 

G. S. Serveth? Whom? What? 

K. C. God ! and his country ! 

G. S. 'Tis well. Such service well becom- 
eth a man. By the authoi'ity vested in me 
by the C. S. of our order, I give him welcome 
to our sacred B. Pronounce the name by 
which he is known amongst his fellow men. 
I would give him a new name. 



\_Instruct.'\ 



INVOCATION. 



Divine Essence! We would recognize 
Thy Presence in our T., consecrated to 
Truth! Let holiest memories come, like 
incense, to our souls ; memories of our an- 
cestors' virtues, and their glorious deeds in 
the holy cause of Truth, Justice, and the 
Rights of Man! inspiring emotions ! holy! 
exalted! worthy of the ceremonies of this 
sacred place. May each heart in this pres- 
ence to other beat in unison, with genial 
sympathies, while our s-ouls, as one, glow 
with the emotions of our holy nature. May 
our cherished brotherhood so live, that when 
we have done with earthly things, we may 
be hailed for service in the Temple not 
made with hands, Eternal, in the heavens. 
Amen I 

CLOSING. 

'Divine Essence! AVith grateful hearts 
we recognize the Holi/ Presence, Inspiration, 
and Guidance, during the ceremonies and 
deliberations of the occasion. Deign to go 
with us to our several homes — to our cham- 
bers of repose — so shall gentle slumbers 
renew our manhood's strength, for better 
service on earth; the asperities of our 
grosser nature be subdued and chastened ; 
our souls fitted for the upper sphere, and 



welcomed for service in the Inner Temple 
there by the hail : " Well done." Amen I 

order of business. 

1. Ceremonies of Opening. 

2. Reading and apjjroval of minutes of 
preceding meeting and reports of Secretary 
and Treasurer. 

3. Balloting for Candidates recommended 
at a former meeting. 

4. Induction ol' Candidates. 

5. Reading and consideration of commu- 
nications from other organizations. 

6. Nomination of Candidates and refer- 
ence to Committee. 

7. Propositions for the good of the Order, 
including immediate purposes and plans, 
and their consideration and discussion. 

8. Lecture. 

9. Infoi'mation concerning the condition 
of members, whether any one is sick or 
in distress, requiring aid and sustenance. 



O. I J. 

V. 

W. 0. C. Gives * * * 

L. V. Who cometh? 

W. 0. C. A citizen we found in the 
hands of the sons of despotism, bound and 
well nigh crushed to death beneath theh 
oppressions. We have brought him hither, 
and would now restore to him the blessings 
of Liberty and Law. 

L. V. Brothers, the purpose ye have de- 
clared, touching this stranger, is most 
worthy. Let him advance to the altar by 
the regular steps; instruct him in our 
chosen solemn attitude, and let him give 
heed to the words which shall be spoken. 

INVOCATION. 

L. V. God of our Fathers, whose inspira- 
tion moved them to deeds of valor, in the 
cause of Eternal Truth, Justice and Equal 
Rights; we, their sons, now invoke Thy 
Divine Presence, in this V. of the T., con- 
secrated to the principles which they incul- 
cated by precept, and by example, and de- 
fended with their lives. Bless our coun- 
try, and restore and protect her liberties. 
Amen. 

L. V. Citizen, thou art now in the V., and 
if found worthy, will be hence ushered into 
the consecrated T., within whose precincts, 
reverence toward the Supreme Being, pa- 
triotism, peace, charity and good fellowship 
are inculcated and cherished. Direct thy 
thoughts within at this moment, and de- 
clare, as thou wouldst answer to a good con- 
science, art thou ready ? 

Response. I am. 

L. V. It is well! I charge thee that If 
thou art impelled hitherward by curiosity; 
if thou cherish other purposes in this re* 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



803 



gard, than the highest and holiest thy heart 
can conceive, it were better for thee that 
thy feet had never passed the threshold of 
our 0. C. Our faithful and well-beloved 
brothers, who have conducted thee hither 
into this presence, are thy Sponsors — a fear- 
ful responsibility is upon them. If thou 
shouldst betray their trust, or stain thy 
manhood by unworthy actions, it will be 
their solemn duty to publish thy shame, so 
that thou shalt be expelled, and ever after 
excluded from the society of honorable 
men. 

Brothers, hear your obligations as Spon- 
sors for the candidate. 

OBLIGATION OF SPONSORS. 

We do solemnly promise and undertake 
that the stranger, whom we have introduced 
into this presence, shall, in all things, prove 
himself a true man; that from his daily 
walk and conversation with his brethren, 
we guarantee his worthiness to be inducted 
into the mysteries of this society. We do 
further promise and undertake for him, 
that he shall faithfully keep secret whatso- 
ever shall transpire in this presence ; and 
that in case he shall betray the confidence 
which he has inspired in us, we will hold it 
our bounden duty to aid in his expulsion 
from all association with honorable men. 
Amen. 

L. V. Hast thou heard and considered the 
obligation of thy Sponsors? 

Answer. I have. 

L. V. Wilt thou well and truly perform 
unto the end, that which they have pro- 
mised on thy behalf? 

Ans. I will. 

L. V. It is well. It is now my duty to 
explain the principles which our society in- 
culcates, and which we, as a fraternity and 
as individuals, aim to illustrate in our lives 
and conversation. 

DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES. 

1st. God hath created and controls the 
Universe. 

2d. All men are endowed by the Creator 
with certain rights — equal so far as there is 
equality in the capacity for the apprecia- 
tion, enjoyment and exercise of those 
rights — some of which are inalienable, 
while others may, by voluntary act or con- 
sent, be qualified, suspended, or relinquish- 
ed, for the purposes of social and govern- 
mental organizations. 

3d. Government arises from the necessi- 
ties of society, and rightful government de- 
rives its sole authority from the will of the 
governed, its chief end being their wel- 
fare. 

4th. The governments organized and ex- 
isting in the original thirteen States of 
f. ' North America, after they had severally 
/ and unitedly renounced their allegiance to 
/ the Government of Great Britain, we re- 
gard as the wisest and best adapted to the 



nature and character of the people of the 
United States. 

5th. That government was established 
originally by thirteen^ free, sovereign and inder 
pendent States, "in oi'der to form a more per- 
fect Union, to establish justice, to insure 
domestic tranquillity, provide for the com- 
mon defense, promote the general welfare, 
and secure the blessings of liberty to the 
people thereof, and their posterity ; being 
intrusted with the powers and supremacy," 
and no further or other, which are specifi- 
cally granted in the compact, entitled the 
Constitution of the United /States, strictly con- 
strued. 

L. V. Dost thou assent to the declaration 
of principles which thou hast just heard ? 

Ans. I do. 

L. V. Present thyself, then, in the atti- 
tude of invocation which thou didst first 
assume before this altar, and receive thy 
obligation. 

OBLIGATION. 

-, fully comprehending the 



T, ... 

declaration of principles which I have just 
heard pronounced, hold them for truth — to 
cherish them in my heart — to illustrate 
them, as far as in me lies, in my daily walk 
and conversation, and to defend them with 
my life. I do solemnly promise, that I will 
never reveal or make known to any person 
or persons, by sign or word, or in any man- 
ner, the ceremonies in which I have just 
taken part, nor the names nor persons of 
those who have participated with me, nor 
any purpose which I have learned or con- 
jectured as any part of the object of this 
society; and that I will, without hesitation 
or delay, perform whatever may be right- 
fully required of me by the duly constituted 
authorities of the society. To the faithful 
performance of all which, in presence of 
these witnesses, I pledge my most sacred 
honor. Amen. 

(Instruct, d;c.) 

O. IS. li. 

W. 0. C. Gives * * * 

C. T. Who Cometh ? 

W. A S. L., whom our worthy brother L. 
V. commanded us to deliver to the C. T. 

C. T. He should have received his first 
lesson in the V. I would be assured of his 
proficiency. 

Let the S. L. advance the signs in which 
he is instructed. 

C. T. 'Tis welL I will conduct thee to 
the A. B. 

• A. B. 

A. B. Who Cometh ? 

C. T. A S. L., whom our trusty brother 
W. has brought hither by command of the 
L. V. I have proved him, and found him 
duly proficient in the lesson he has r» 
ceived; he would journey East for instruc- 
tion. 



804 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



A. B. His desire shall be gratified ; but it 
is my duty, first, to submit to him the lesson 
of the T., and then to demand of him a 
solemn obligation ; giving him assurance 
that such obligation requires of him noth- 
ing inconsistent with his duty to his God, 
his family, or himself S. L., with this as- 
surance, art thou willing to take such an 
obligation ? 

S. L. I am. 

LESSON. 

1st. A well defined belief in a Creator 
and Supreme Ruler of the universe, imparts 
true dignity to man. 

2d. The ideas and principles maintained 
by our 0. on the subject of government, are 
identical with those taught and defended 
by the founders of American liberty in the 
original thirteen States of North America. 

3d. The liberties of those States were 
assailed by despotic power, which aimed at 
their conquest and subjugation ; hence they 
made common cause for their mutual de- 
fense, and estabhshed friendly relations 
with each other, in the compact entitled 
"Articles of Confederation and Perpetual 
Union between the States." 

4th. When those States had maintained 
their freedom and independence, they sev- 
erally entered into a compact entitled the 
Constitution of the United States of Amer- 
ica, for the ends and purposes therein dis- 
tinctly declared and specified ; and the 
government thereby created was intrusted 
by the States, acting in their several capaci- 
ties of Free and Independent States, with 
powers sufficient to the accomplishment of 
those ends and purposes, and no other; 
powers not delegated to that government 
being, by the express letter of the compact, 
" reserved to the States or to the people 
respectively." 

5th. Sovereignty resides in and with the 
people of the States respectively, which are 
parties to the Constitution of the United 
States. It can not be alienated, neither 
can it be delegated. Some of its powers 
may be exercised by delegated authority, 
while others can not be so exercised, except 
at the sacrifice, on the part of the constitu- 
ent, of all that lends dignity to man's rela- 
tion to government. 

6th. The Government designated the 
United States of America has no sover- 
eignty, because that is an attribute belong- 
ing to the people in their respective State 
organization, and with which they have not 
endowed that government as their common 
agent. It was by the terms of this com- 
pact, constituted by the States, through the 
express will of the people thereof severally, 
such common agent to use and exercise 
certain specified and limited jjowers. It 
was authorized so far as regards its status 
and relations, as a common agent in the 
exercise of the powers carefully and jeal- 
ously delegated to it, to call itself " su- 



preme," but not "sovereign." Supremacy, 
as plainly intended by the tenor and spirit 
of article VI of the Constitution, was cre- 
ated, defined and limited by the sovereign- 
ties themselves. 

7th. In accordance with these principles, 
the Federal Government can exercise only 
delegated power; hence, if those who shall 
have been chosen to administer that Gov- 
ernment, shall assume to exercise power 
not delegated, they should be regarded and 
dealt with as usurpers. 

8th. The claim of "inherent power," or 
"war power," as also "State necessity," or 
"military necessity," on part of the func- 
tionaries of a constitutional government, for 
sanction of any arbitrary exercise of power, 
we utterly reject and repudiate. 

9th. All power resides in the people, and 
is delegated always to be exercised for the 
advancement of the common weaL 

10th. Whenever the officials, to whom the 
people have intrusted the powers of the 
government, shall refuse to administer it in 
strict accordance with its constitution, and 
shall assume and exercise power or author- 
ity not delegated, it is the inherent right, 
and imperative duty of the people, to resist 
such officials, and, if need be, expel them 
bj"^ force of arms. Such resistance is not 
revolution, but is solely the assertion of 
right. 

11th. It is incompatible with the history 
and nature of our system of government, 
that federal authority should coerce by 
arms a sovereign State; and all intimations 
of such power or right, were expresslj^ with- 
held in the Constitution, which conferred 
upon the Federal Government all its au- 
thority. 

12th. Upon the preservation of the sov- 
ereignty of the States, depends the preser- 
vation of civil and personal liberty. 

13th. In a convention of delegates, 
elected by the people of a State, is recog- 
nized the impersonation of the sovereignty 
of that State. The declaration of such con- 
vention upon the subject matter for which 
it was assembled, is the ultimate expression 
of that sovereignty. Such convention may 
refer its action back to its constituents, or 
the people may reverse the action of one 
convention by the voice of another. Thus 
sovereignty resides in the people of each 
State, and speaks alone through their con- 
ventions. S. L., what sayest thou to this 
lesson? Do its teachings command thy 
unqualified assent ? 

S. L. They do. 

A. B. Present thyself, then, in the attitude 
in which thou didst plight thy solemn vows 
in the V., holding in thy right hand the 
sacred emblem of our 0. 

OBLIGATIOK. 



I, , in the presence of God 

and these witnesses, do solemnly declare 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



305 



that I do herein freely renew the vows 
which I phghted in the V. I do further 
promise that I will never reveal, nor make 
knovv^n any thing which my eyes may be- 
hold, or any word which my ears may hear 
in this T., nor in any other T., nor in any 
other place where this fellowship may be 
assembled. That I will never speak of, nor 
intimate, any measure or measures, whether 
contemplated or determined, of this 0., to 
any one except to a fellow of the 0. That 
I will never explain the use or signification 
of the emblems or insignia of the 0., to any 
one not a fellow thereof, under any pre- 
tense whatsoever, neither by persuasion nor 
by coercion; that I will never reveal or 
make known any or either of the signs, 
hails, passwords, watchwords, nor initial 
letters belonging to this 0., except to prove 
or communicate with a fellow thereof; that 
I will never pronounce the name of this 0. 
in the hearing of any man, woman, or child, 
unless to a fellow thereof; that I will ever 
have in most holy keeping each and every 
secret of this 0., which may be confided to 
me by a fellow thereof, either within or 
without the T. ; that I will never recom- 
mend, for fellowship in this 0., any man 
who is not a citizen of an American State, 
except by dispensation to that end by com- 
petent authority ; neither any person who 
has not attained the age of eighteen years, 
neither any one unsound in mind, neither 
any one of African descent, whether slave 
or free, neither a person of bad repute ; that 
I will ever cherish toward each and every 
w^orthy fellow of this 0., fraternal regard 
and fellowship ; that I will ever aid a wor- 
thy fellow in distress, if in my power so to 
do ; that I will never wrong a fellow, nor 
see him wronged if in my power to prevent 
it ; that I will at all times implicitly obey, 
without question or remonstrance, all right- 
ful commands of the constituted authori- 
ties of this 0. ; that I will always recognize 
and respond to the hail of a fellow, when it 
shall be made in accordance with the in- 
structions and injunctions of this 0., and 
not otherwise ; and should I cease to be a 
fellow of this 0., either of my own volition 
or by expulsion, 1 will hold and preserve 
inviolate my vows and promises herein de- 
clared, as truly as while I am in full fellow- 
ship. All this I do solemnly promise sa- 
credly to observe, perform and keep, under 
such penalties as shall be decreed by the 
competent authority of this O. Amen. 



A. B. S. L., thy journey is well nigh ac- 
complished. Somewhat yet remains, and 
the Sons of Despotism will beset thy path 
and aim to turn thee back — peradventure 
will seek thy life. Then put thy trust in 
God and Truth ; still thy journey leadeth 
due East until thou art hailed by the G. S., 
who will further instruct thee. Beware, 
20 



lest thou bear thee toward the North too 
far and lose thy way; as well, also, take 
heed lest the South entice thee too far 
thither. We have a trusty F. G., on either 
side thy way, who, true and constant at his 
post, perchance may hail thee. Receive 
what he shall ofler, and give earnest heed 
to all his words. S. L., be thy watchword — 
Onward ! 

F. G. N. 

F. G. N. Who Cometh ? Advance. 

C. T. A S. L., by command of our A. B. 
in the West, journeying East for light and 
instruction. 

F. G. N. Then has he left the straight 
path and lost his way ; danger is in every 
step he advances ; bid him turn back ; he 
has forgotten the instructions of our A. B. 
Was he not charged to follow the straight 
and narrow path? 

C. T. True ! we entered upon the straight 
path, but ere we had proceeded far we were 
bewildered and lost our way. Wilt thou 
direct us hence ? 

F. G. N. I will ; but first I must prove 
him, that I may know by what right he 
claims my care and assistance. 

C. T. Lo ! he hath a sign. ( Gives it. ) 

F. G. N. 'Tis well. Hath he a pass- 
word? 

C. T. He has, and will give it. {Gives it.) 

F. G. N. 'Tis well. Thy watchword? 

S. L. Onward. 

F. G. N. 'Tis well! Now depart due 
South. Shouldst thou reach the post of 
our G. in the South, he will further instruct 
thee. Thy watchword still — Onward ! 



F. G. S. Who cometh? Strangers, ad- 
vance. Declare thy way and purpose. 

C T. I come with this S. L. from our 
worthy A. B. in the West, who commanded 
us to journey due East to the G. S., for 
light and instruction, charging us to follow 
the straight path; we had not journeyed 
far when we lost our way ; but the worthy 
F. G. N. did hail us as we passed his post, 
and turned our faces hitherward. Wilt 
thou show us our path ? 

F. G. S. I will. But first I would prove 
this friend ; I know thee well for a true 
man. Let the S. L. advance the sign. 
{Gives it.) 

F. G. S. 'Tis well. Hath he a password? 

C. T. He has. 

F. G. S. Bid him give it me. {Gives it.) 
'Tis well. Thy watchword? 

S. L. Onward. 

F. G. S. Tis well. Conduct him again 
to the straight and narrow path; thence 
onward due East to our G. S. Let thy 
watchword be ever and ever — Onward I 



G. S. Who cometh ? Advance. 



306 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



C. T. G. S., I have brought a S. L. He 
is from the West, and hath journeyed East 
for instruction. He is a citizen; but he 
serveth. 

G. S. Serveth! Whom— what? 

C. T. God and his country. 

G. S. ' Tis well. Such service fitly be- 
cometh the good citizen. By the authority 
vested in me, I give him welcome into our 
T., and pronounce him a worthy F. 0. S. L. 

{Instruct^ &c.) 

INVOCATION. 

God! Creator of all men, we invoke 
Thy jDresence. Help us as Thou didst help 
our fathers. Before Thee we are ofienders; 
but spare us. We pursue Justice — Thou art 
the author of Justice. We seek Liberty — 
Thou art the giver of Liberty. We desire 
Peace — Thou art the God of Peace. Purify 
our intentions ; guide our counsels, and 
give success to our efforts. Amen. 



God! from Thee all wise counsels and 
all good works do proceed. Further Thou 
our counsels, prosper our works, and grant 
us Thy peace. Amen. 

ORDER OF BUSINESS. 

L Ceremonies of Opening. 

2. Reading and approval of minutes of 
preceding meeting, and i*eports of Secretary 
and Treasurer. 

3. Balloting for Candidates recommended 
at a former meeting. 

4. Induction of Candidates. 

5. Reading and consideration of commu- 
nications from other organizations. 

6. Nomination of Candidates and refer- 
ence to Committee. 

7. Propositions for the good of the 0., in- 
cluding immediate purposes and plans, and 
their consideration and discussion. 

8. Lecture. 

9. Information concerning the condition 
of Members, whether any one is sick or in 
distress, requiring aid and assistance. 

INSTALLATION. 

The officers elect, being up standing, the 
Com. T. shall propound to each the follow- 
ing questions: 

Com. T. having been duly elected 

to the office of . do you accept the 

position to which you have been assigned ? 

Ans. I do. 

Com. Brothers, are you content with the 
choice you have made of ? 

Ans. We are. 

The Com. will then administer the fol- 
lowing oath of office to each, beginning at 
the highest, and declare them duly quali- 
fied to enter upon their respective duties: 

OBLIGATION. 



I, , having been elected to the office 

of , for the ensuing term, do solemnly 



swear, in the prei.Gnce of these witnesses, 
to support the constitution and laws of the 
0. S. L., to obey all rightful orders of my 
immediate G. Com. and the S. Com., and 

perform the duties of to the best of 

my ability, so help me God. Amen. 



K. o. s. L. 



K. C. W. Who Cometh ? 

K. C. A worthy Fellow of the 0. S. L., 
who, having been duly elected, desires in- 
duction into the I. T. of our 0. 

K. C. W. It is well. His desire shall be 
gratified ; but it is my duty first to submit 
to him the lesson of I. T., and then to de- 
mand of him a solemn obligation, giving 
him assurance that such obligation require? 
of him nothing inconsistent with his duty 
to God, to his country, to his family, or to 
himself. F. S. L., with this assurance, art 
thou content ? 

Ans. I am. 

LESSON OF THE I. T. 

The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798, 
Drafted by Jefferson and Madison. 

1. The several States composing the Uni- 
ted States of America, are not united on 
the principle of unlimited submission to 
the General Government, but by a compact 
under the style and title of a Constitution 
for the United States, and of amendments 
thereto, they constituted a General Govern- 
ment for special purposes, delegated to that 
Government certain definitive powers, re- 
serving each State to itself the residuary 
mass of right to their own self-govei'n- 
ment ; and whensoever the General Govern- 
ment assumes undelegated powers, its acts 
are unauthoritative, void, and of no force ; to 
this compact each State acceded as a State, 
and is an integral party ; that this Govern- 
ment, created by this compact, was not 
made the exclusive or final judge of the 
extent of the powers delegated to itself; 
since that would have made its discretion, 
and not the Constitution, the measure of its 
powers ; but that, as in all other cases of 
compact, among powers having no common 
judge, each party has an equal right to 
judge for itself as well of infractions as of 
the mode and measures of redress. 

2. It is true as a general principle, and is 
also expressly declared, by one of the 
amendments to the Constitution, that the 
" powers not delegated to the United 
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited 
to it by the States, are reserved to the 
States respectively, or to the people;" and 
no power over the freedom of religion, 
freedom of speech, or freedom of the press, 
being delegated to the United States by 
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



307 



the States, all lawful powers respecting the 
same, did of right remain, and were re- 
served to the States or the people ; and thus 
was manifested their determination to re- 
tain to themselves the right of judging 
how far the licentiousness of speech, and 
of the press, may be abridged, without 
lessening their useful freedom ; and how 
far those abuses, which can not be separa- 
ted from their use, should be tolerated, 
rather than the use be destroyed, and thus 
also they guarded against all abridgment, 
by the United States,' of the freedom of 
religious opinions and exercises, and re- 
tained to themselves the right of protect- 
ing the same from all human restraint or 
interference ; and in addition to this general 
principle and express declaration, another 
and more special provision has been made 
by one of the amendments to the Constitu- 
tion, which expressly declares, that "Con- 
gress shall make no law respecting an es- 
tablishment of religion, or prohibiting the 
free exercise thereof, or abridging the free- 
dom of speech, or the press," thereby 
guarding in the same sentence, and under 
the same' words, the freedom of religion, 
of speech, and of the press, insomuch, that 
whatever violated either, throws down the 
sanctuary which covers the others, and, 
therefore, libels, falsehood, and defamation, 
equally with heresy and false religion, are 
withheld from the cognizance of Federal 
tribunals. 

3. This 0. does explicitly and perempto- 
rily declare that it views the power of the 
Federal Government, as resulting from the 
compact to which the States are parties: 
as limited by the plain sense and intention 
of the instrument constituting that com- 
pact; as no further valid than they are 
authorized by the grants enumerated in 
that compact ; and that in the case of a delib- 
erate, palpable and dangerous exercise of 
other powers not granted by the said com- 
pact, the States, who are parties thereto, 
have the right, and are in duty bound, to 
interpose, for arresting the progress of the 
evil, and for maintaining, within their re- 
spective limits, the authorities, rights and 
liberties appertaining to them. 

K. C. W. F. S. L., what say est thou to 
this lesson ? Do its teachings command 
thv unqualified assent ? 

F. S. L. They do. 

K. C. W. Present thyself, then, in the atti- 
tude in which thou didst plight thy solemn 
vows in the T. 



OBLIGATION. 



I, 



-, within the precincts of 



this I. T., do now freely renew the vows 
plighted in my progress hither; I do also 
solemnly swear that I will faithfully keep 
secret every word that I may hear, and will 
never, by speech, sign, or intimation, reveal 
any thing which I may see within or with- 



out this I. T., pertaining to the same, unless 
to a true K. ; that I w'ill never explain or 
exhibit any of the signs, hails, passwords, 
watchwords, emblems, insignia, initial let- 
ters, nor the seal of the I. T., except to 
prove or communicate with a true K. I do 
further sw'ear, that I will, as becometh a 
true K., at all times, and in all places, to 
the utmost o£ my ability, respect, perform, 
and obey, each and every order, conmiand, 
or request, made to or of me by the Iv. C. 
C, or other superior authority, touching 
any matter or thing which relates or per- 
tains to the pvirposes or plans of the K. 0. 
S. L. ; and I do further swear that 1 will 
ever bear in mind the lesson of the I. T., as 
expounded to me in this presence, and will 
defend the princij^les therein laid down, 
with my life, if need be; that my sword 
shall ever be drawn in supj^ort of the right, 
and that I will never take up arms in any 
cause as a mercenary. 1 do further swear, 
that I will ever cherish kindly regard and 
fellowship toward all true K.'s every-where, 
and will ever aid them in the defense of 
their rights; that I will ever honor, cherish, 
and protect woman and the orphan, and 
especially the mother, widow, sister, or or- 
phan of a deceased K., and will shield them 
from wrong, insult and oppression ; and I 
do also swear, that I will never induct, nor 
consent to the induction, of any one into 
the 1. T., who shall not have been duly and 
well instructed in the T. D., nor then, until 
he shall have been unanimously approved 
by a legal conclave of K. 0. S. L., nor in any 
place which has not been appointed and 
consecrated to that end by the competent 
authority, nor in the presence of a less ■ 
number than thirteen true K.'s, each and 
all of whom shall consent and approve to 
such induction, nor until I shall have been 
duly authorized thereto by authority eman- 
ating from the G. C. ; and, finally, I do 
solemnly swear, in the presence of these 
K.'s, my witnesses, to all and singular the 
foregoing, with full knowledge, and with 
my full assent, that the penalty declared 
against any violation of any part of this, 
my oath, shall be such as may be declared 
by the G. C, and approved by the S. C. of 
the 0. S. L. Divine presence ! approve my 
truth, and you, ye K.'s, hear and bear wit- 
ness. Amen ! 

K. C. W. It is well. The K. C. will now 
conduct thee to the K. C. C. 



K. C. C. Who Cometh ? Advance. 

K. C. A worthy fellow of the 0. S. L., 
who, having taken the obligation required 
in this I. T., is, by command of tlie K. C. 
W., brought before thee for full induction. 

K. C. C. It is well. Let him kneel in 
token of service to God and his country. * 
* * * Eise, , K. 0. S. L., and re- 



ceive thy charge. 



308 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Brother ! Thy presumed worthiness hath 
Becured thy induction into the I. T. of 0. 
Let thy deeds approve thee worthy. Obe- 
dience, faith, truth, courage, sincerity, self- 
denial — these are the virtues of the true 
K. Make good thy vows. Honor thy God. 
Love thy country. So shalt thou discharge 
thy duty on earth, and prepare thyself for 
the beatifcudes of the temple not made with 
hands. Hear the words of inspiration ! 
then onward! still be thy watchword. On- 
ward ! 

K. L. [Here reads Isaiah, chap. LIX, 
verses 14 to 19, inclusive.] 

K. C. C. llmtructs.'] 



II. 

M. E. K. O. S. L. 

M. E. K. C. W. Who Cometh ? Advance. 

K C. A true K., who, having been duly 
elected thereto, desires induction in the I — t 
T. of our most excellent 0. 

M. E. K. C. W. It is well. Let him pre- 
sent himself in our chosen attitude of invo- 
cation. 

OBLIGATION. 



I, 



-, in the presence of God 



and these M. E. K.'s, do solemnly swear, 
that I will never reveal, or make known, 
directly or indirectly, any thing whatever, 
pertaining to the M.'E. K, 0. S. L. ; neither 
will I indicate, by word or intimation, any 
thing of, or concerning the same, except to 
a brother thereof, whom I shall have first 
duly proved. I do further swear, that 1 
will, at all times, and in all places, yield 
prompt and implicit obedience, to the ut- 
most of my ability, without remonstrance, 
hesitation or delay, to any and every man- 
date, order or request, of my immediate M. 
E. G. C, in all things touching the purposes 
of the 0. S. L., and to defend the principles 
thereof, when assailed in my own State or 
country, in whatsoever capacity may be as- 
signed to me by authority of our 0. ; and 1 
do further swear, that I will never induct, 
or consent to the induction, of any person 
into the I — t T., until he shall have first been 
approved by at least thirteen M. E. K.'s of 
the local C. to which he is proposed for in- 
duction, except by express dispensation to 
that end from superior authority ; and that 
I will ever faithfully keep secret every 
counsel of M. E. K.'s, whether in or out of 
C. To all and singular the foregoing, I do 
solemnly swear, with full knowledge, and 
my assent, that the penalty for any viola- 
tion of any part thereof, shall be whatso- 
ever may be decreed by the G. C. S., and 
approved by the S. C— 0. S. L.; so help mo, 
God! Amen! 

K. C. C. llnstnicls.^ 



GENERAL LAWS OF THE S. L. 

COUNTY PARENT TEMPLES. 

ARTICLE 1. 

Section 1. A Parent County T. may be 
instituted by an eligible brother who shall 
be authorized by the Grand Council, or by 
the G. Com., upon the application of five 
good and true men, by paying the expen- 
ses incurred for books, traveling, etc., 
and three dollars per day to the person 
who shall be designated to institute the 
same. 

Sec. 2. Branch County T.'s may be insti- 
tuted by the mode above, or by the officers 
of the Parent T. Provided, That the Grand 
Sig. of any Parent T., of this State, be au- 
thorized to organize subordinate temples 
in any township where none have been or- 
ganized, subject to the constitution and rules 
of this order, and that until a Parent T. 
be organized in such county, to which said 
township belongs, the secretary thereof 
shall report to the G. Sec. of this State. 

Sec. 3. The names and location of Parent 
and Branches, shall not be changed with- 
out permission of the G. Council, or without 
written consent of the G. Sec. 

article il 

Section 1. Every T. in the State of Indi- 
ana shall meet twice in every month, and 
oftener if they shall deem proper, and shall 
be opened as near as may be at the time 
prescribed by the Rules of Order. 

Sec. 2. Special meetings may be held, 
upon the call of G. S., or when requested 
to do so by five members of the T., general 
notice of such meeting to be given as far 
as possible. 

Sec 3. At any regular or special meeting, 
at which the first and second officers shall 
be absent, a qualified degree member may 
be chosen to preside. 

Sec 4. Each T. is empowered to designate 
what number, not less than five, shall con- 
stitute a quorum for the transaction of bu- 
siness. 

article in. 

Section 1. The elective officers of the Pa- 
rent T.'s shall be— M. E. K. C; M. E. K. C. 
W.; M. E. K. Sec; M. E. K. Treas.; M. E. K. 
Lecturer of the V.; and M. E. K. Rep. to 
G. C. The officers shall be appointed M. 
E. K. Cond.; M. E. K. Marshal; M. E. K. 
W., T.; M. E. K. W., 0. C. 

Sec. 2. The elective and appointed officers 
of a Branch County T., shall be those de- 
signated in the ritual of the order. 

Sec 3. The election of all officers shall 
take place annually, on or not to exceed 
two weeks previous to the 22d day of Feb- 
ruary in each year. 

Sec 4. At the same time and place the 
Parent T. shall elect two Representatives 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



809 



to the G. Council, and one additional Repre- 
sentative for every one thousand members 
in said county. 

Sec. 5. All elections shall be by ballot, 
and a majority of all the votes given be ne- 
cessary to a choice. Provided^ That when- 
ever there shall be but one candidate, the 
election may be by viva voce. 

Sec. 6. Any elected or appointed officer 
who shall absent himself from the Temple 
for three successive stated meetings, unless 
such absence be satisfactorily accounted 
for, shall thereby vacate his ollice, and the 
vacancy shall be filled by special election, 
and the member so elected or appointed to 
fill such vacancy shall, if he serve under 
such election or appointment, receive all 
the honors of the station as though he had 
served the full term. 

Sec. 7 All elective officers shall continue 
to serve until their respective successors are 
duly elected and qualified. 

ARTICLE IV. 

Section 1. The duties of the G. S. and 
M. E. K. C. shall he- 
ist. To preside at all meetings of the 
Temple at which they may be present, and 
open and close the same in due form ; to 
preserve strict order and decorum, and en- 
force the Constitution and Laws of the 
Order. 

2d. To decide all questions of order, sub- 
ject to appeal, by two members, from his 
decision to the Temple. 

3d. To give the casting vote on all ques- 
tions before the Temple, in which there 
may be an equal division of members, ex- 
cept in the election of officers and appeals 
from his decision. 

4th. To inspect all ballots on application 
for membership, degrees, or certificates, 
and report thereon to the Temple. 

5th. To sign all orders drawn on the 
Treasurer, for the payment of such sums of 
money as may, from time to time, be voted by 
the Temple, and also such documents as may 
require his signature to authenticate them. 

6th. To appoint the officers herein be- 
fore specified, at the time of his installa- 
tion, and to fill vacancies in the same 
whenever they may occur. 

7th. To appoint, at the same time, such 
standing committees as the Temple may 
prescribe, and such other committees, from 
time to time, as may be required by the 
Constitution and Laws, or directed by the 
Temple. 

8th. To see that a brother is visited im- 
mediately upon being advised of his illness 
or distress, and to continue to do so at least 
once per week, during such illness or dis- 
tress, and see that he is duly provided with 
attendants. 

9th. To install their successors in office. 

Sec 2. Duties of the M. E. K. Sec. 

1st. To keep, in suitable books for that 



purpose, the accounts of the Temple, and 
the members thereof 

2d. To receive all moneys due the Temple, 
pay the same to the Treasurer, and take his 
receipt therefor. 

3d. To make out all notices that may be 
required for special meetings, attendance 
upon the sick, or distressed. 

4th. To furnish the Temple, on the night 
preceding the expiration of each term of 
three months, a list of the members thereof, 
who are delinquent, with the amount due 
by each. 

5th. To make out, at the expiration of 
each term of three months, a report to the 
Grand Council, in such form as said Grand 
Council shall direct, which he shall read in 
open Temple, and record in a book to be 
kept for that purpose ; and when duly ap- 
proved by the Temple and signed by the 
proper officers, he shall forward the same 
to the Grand Secretary, which shall be done 
within ten days from the expiration of each 
term of three months. 

6th. To enroll in a book, provided for that 
purpose, the names of the members of the 
Temple, age, occupation, and residence 
thereof, and the degrees taken by each; 
noting from time to time, in a proper mar- 
ginal column, the fact of death, suspension, 
expulsion, or withdrawal, as the same may 
occur. 

7th. To attend the committees appointed 
to audit the books and accounts of the Tem- 
ple, and render such assistance as may be 
necessary. 

8th. To deliver up to his successor in 
office, all books and papers appertaining to 
his office, which may be in his possession. 

9th. Generally to do and perform such 
other acts as may be required of him by 
the Temple, and by the laws and usages of 
the order. 

He shall receive for his services such com- 
pensation as the Temple may determine. 

10th. To keep accurate minutes of the 
Temple in a book for that purpose. 

article v. 

Section 1. It shall be the duty of the 
Treasurer — 

1st. To receive from the Secretary all 
moneys due the T. 

2d. To pay all orders drawn upon the 
funds in his hands, when properly at- 
tested. 

3d. To have his books and accounts ready 
for settlement at the expiration of his term 
of office, and open for inspection by the 
officer of the T., or a committee appointed 
for that purpose, at all times. 

4th. To deliver to his successor in office, 
at the expiration of his term of office, re- 
signation thereof, or removal therefrom, all 
moneys remaining in his hands, and all 
books and papers pertaining to his office. 

To give bond with two sureties, condi- 



310 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



tioned upon the faithful discharge of his 
duties, as the T. may require. 

Sec. 2. The terms of three months shall 
commence February 22d of each year. 

ARTICLE VI. MEMBERSHIP. 

Section 1. S. L . Any white male 

person, of good moral character, above the 
age of eighteen years, being proposed by 
one, and vouched for by two members in 

good standing, may receive the S. L 

lesson of this order. 

Sec. 2. When the name of a candidate is 
proposed for membership, it shall be refer- 
red to a committee of three, appointed by 
the G. S. ; said committee to report on such 
proposition at the next regular meeting of 
the Temple, and no balloting for member- 
ship to take place until the committee report 
as aforesaid. 

Sec. 3. First degree members must be ad- 
vanced in accordance with provisions laid 
down in the ritual of the second and third 
degrees. 

Sec. 4. All candidates for degrees must 
be balloted for. One negative vote lays the 
application over one week; two negative 
votes, for three months; three negative 
votes disposes of it finally, unless recon- 
sidered. 

Sec. 5. A member changing his residence, 
wishing to withdraw from one T. and unite 
with another, shall be entitled to receive a 
certificate of membership, which, being 
filed with his application, if found worthy, 
shall be transferred, by vote of the T., at 
his new residence. 

Sec. 6. No T. is permitted to receive ap- 
plications from laersons not residents of the 
county in which the T. is located, and all 
applications must be made to the T. nearest 
to the applicant's residence. — Res. of G. C. 

Sec. 7. An expelled member can only be 
reinstated by the consent of the Temple 
from which he was expelled. 

Sec. 8. If a person is proposed for mem- 
bership and elected, and previous to initia- 
tion the Temple obtains information of bad 
conduct, it may refuse to initiate. 

article Vn. FEES AND DUES. 

Section 1. The fee for the first or branch 
T. degree, shall be one dollar; the fee for 
the second shall be one dollar and fifty 
cents; and the fee for the third shall be 
two dollars and fifty cents. 

Sec. 2. The monthly dues for each and 
every member, shall not be less than ten 
nor more than fifty cents. 

LAWS OF GENERAL APPLICATION. 

1st. It shall be the duty of every member 
of this order, when possessed of any infor- 
mation touching the improper demeanor of 
a brother, to file written complaint with his 
immediate G. S. or C, and shall make it 
known to no other person, and it shall be 
tlie duty of such ofiicer specifying the 



charge in regular meeting of T., withhold- 
ing name of the informant, appoint com- 
mittee of five to examine and report upon 
such charge, and, if upon report of com- 
mittee, such charge shall be sustained by 
said T., then said accused shall be notified 
to appear, and shall be regularly tried by 
the T., said committee conducting the pro- 
secution, and accused shall have counsel in 
his behalf, witnesses may be examined, and 
testimony of those not members of the 
order may be taken, but not ex parte. 

Upon fair hearing the T. shall decide 
upon his guilt and punishment, which shall 
not be higher than expulsion from the 
order. The various grades of punishment 
shall be reprimand, suspension for a time, 
and expulsion. 

2d. It shall be the duty of all T.'s, in case i 
of expulsion of a member or members, to 
notify the G. Sec. by letter ; and it shall be 
the duty of said G. Sec. to notify all T.'s in 
this jurisdiction of said fact. 

Visiting Brothers. 
3d. It shall be the duty of the presiding 
oflBcer of each and every T., whenever ne- 
cessary, to appoint two competent brothers 
an examining committee for the evening; 
for no visiting brother can be admitted to 
the T., unless he shall be known, recognized 
by the officers, vouched for by a brother, or 
proved by the committee so appointed. 

Payment of Assessments. 

4th. It shall be the duty of each and 
every P. T. in the State, to remit to the G. 
Sec. such amounts as the G. Council shall 
levy against them, promptly, upon the ap- 
plication of the G. Sec, and in case of fail- 
ure so to do for a period of three months, 
such P. T. shall forfeit their organization. 

We recommend the Constitution of the 
Society of the Illini, for all public clubs; 
and the rules of order, adopted by the G. 
Council, for the government of all subor- 
dinate T.'s in Indiana. 

5th. Any additional by-laws may be made 
by each County Temple, not inconsistent 
with the laws of the Grand Council, by a two- 
thirds vote of the members of such temple, 
four weeks notice being given therefor. 

RULES OF ORDER. 

1st. When the presiding officer takes the 
chair, the officers and members shall take 
their respective seats; and at the sound of 
the gavel there shall be a general silence, 
under the penalty of a public reprimand. 

2d. The business of the annual meetings 
shall be taken up in the following order : 

Temple opened ; 

Officers' roll called ; 

Minutes of last stated and intervening 
meetings read and passed upon; 

Certificates of members; 

Reports of Temples ; 

Reports of Committees ; 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



311 



Unfinished business ; 

New business. 

3d. The presiding officer shall preserve 
order and decorum, and pronounce the de- 
cision of the Temple on all subjects ; he 
may speak to points of order in preference 
ro other members, rising from his seat for 
that purpose; he shall decide questions of 
order 'without debate, unless entertaining 
doubts on the point, subject to an aj^peal to 
the Temple by any two members, on which 
appeal no member shall speak more than 
once. 

4th. No member shall disturb another in 
his speech, unless to call him to order, nor 
stand up to interrupt him, nor when a mem- 
ber is speaking, pass between him and the 
chair, or leave the hall. 

5th. Every member when he speaks shall 
rise and respectfully address the chair, and 
when he has finished shall sit down. Mem- 
bers speaking shall confine themselves to 
the question under debate, and avoid all 
personality or indecorous language, as well 
as any reflection upon the Temple or its 
members. 

6th. If two or more members rise to 
speak at the same time, the chair shall de- 
cide which is entitled to the floor. 

7 th. No member shall speak until he has 
been recognized by the chair. 

8th. No member shall speak more than 
once on the same subject or question, until 
all the members, wishing to spealo, shaU 
have had an opportunity to do so, nor more 
than twice without permission of the T. 

9th. If" a member, while speaking, be 
called to order by the chair, he shall cease 
speaking, and take liis seat until the 
question of order is determined, and per- 
mission is given him to proceed. 

10th. No motion shall be subject to de- 
bate until it shall have been seconded, and 
stated by the chair, and it shall be reduced 
to writing if desired by any member. 

11th. When a question is before the T., 
no motion shall be received except for ad- 
journment — the previous question — to lie 
on the table — to postpone indefinitely — to 
postpone to a certain time — to divide — to 
commit or amend; which motions shall 
severally have preference in the order here- 
in arranged. 

12th. On the call of five members, the 
previous question shall be put. The pre- 
vious question having been ordered, all 
further amendments and debates shall be 
precluded, but the amendments that have 
been previously oSered shall be voted upon 
in their order before the main question. 

13th. When a blank is to be filled, and 
different sums, numbers, or times shall be 
proposed, the question shall first be taken 
upon the highest sum or number, and long- 
est or latest time. 

14th. No motion for reconsideration shall 
be received unless moved by a member 



who voted in the majority in the first in* 
stance. 

15th. Any member may excuse himself 
from serving on any committee at the time 
of his appointment, if he is then a member 
of one other committee. 

16th. The person first named on a com- 
mittee shall act as chairman thereof until 
another is chosen by themselves. 

17th. The consequences of a measure may 
be reprobated in strong terms; but to ar- 
raign the motives of those who propose or 
advocate it, is a personality and against 
order. 

18th. While the chair is putting a ques- 
tion or addressing the Temple, or whilst 
any other member is speaking, no member 
shall walk about or leave the Temple, or 
entertain private discourse. 

19th. No motion can be made by one 
member while another is speaking ; and no 
motion can be made without rising and ad- 
dressing the chair. 

20th. The chair, or any member, doubting 
the decision of the question, may call for a 
division of the Temple, and a count of the 
affirmative and negative vote. 

21st. All reports of committees shall be 
made in writing. 

22d. Any member has a right to protest, 
and to have his protest spread upon the 
journal. — C. M. 

23d. Motions for adjournment, the pre- 
vious question, to lie on the table, and to 
postpone indefinitely, shall be put without 
debate. 

24th. Any of these rules may be dis- 
pensed with by a vote of two-thirds of the 
members present. 



CONSTITUTION OF THE GRAND COUN- 
CIL OF S. L. OF INDIANA. 



Section 1. This body derives and exer- 
cises its power and authority from and by 
virtue of authority vested in it by the Su- 
preme Grand Council of the United States. 

Sec. 2. The members of this G. C. shall 
consist of Eepresentatives duly elected and 
commissioned by the various County Tem- 
ples. Each County Temple shall be enti- 
tled to two Representatives ; and for each 
one thousand members one additional 
Representative. 

Sec. 3. The legislative functions of this 
body shall be vested in such Representa- 
tives duly chosen and commissioned, and 
the elective officers of this G. C. 

Sec. 4. All such Representatives and Mil- 
itary Officers, so accredited, shall be enti- 
tled to receive the sign of the G. C. 

Sec. 5. Representatives shall be elected 
at any regular meeting, prior to the 22d 



3Vz 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



day of February, in each year, and hold 
their oflBce during the term of one year, or 
during the pleasure of the County T. 

ARTICLE II. 

Sec. 1. The elective officers of this G. C. 
shall consist of the following, who shall be 
elected at or prior to the annual meeting, 
held on the 22d day of February, in each 
year, viz.: G. C; Dep. Gr. C; G. Sec; G. Treas.; 
G. C. to S. C; one Maj. Gen'l for each mili- 
tary district, prescribed by law. 

Sec. 2. The appointed officers of this G. 
body shall be, one Grand Marshal, one 
Grand Conductor, one Grand Chaplain, one 
Grand Warden of the Council, one Grand 
Warden of the 0. C. 

Sec. 3. The members of the G. Com. staff, 
and all military officers above the rank of 
Colonel, shall be ex officio members of this 
G. C, and entitled to the sign and to partici- 
pate in its deliberations. 

Sec. 4. When upon a call for a vote by 
counties, all shall be excluded save the 
duly elected Representatives, and in case 
of a tie vote the G. Com. presiding shall 
give the casting vote. 

article III. 

Section I. This G. C. shall have the sole 
right to determine its own membership, 
and may exclude any one, representative 
or otherwise, who shall be convicted of in- 
decorous deportment, or any dishonorable 
act. Provided^ That no punishment higher 
than reprimand shall be inflicted, expul- 
sion from this Order being reserved to the 
County Temples. 

Sec. 2. There shall be chosen, annually, 
the Grand Commander, and two additional 
members of this body, delegates to the S. 
G. C, to whom the G. Secretary shall issue 
certificates of election, with the seal of the 
Council. — Law of 8. G. C 

Sec. 3. The meetings of this G. C, regu- 
lar and special, shall be held at such time 
and place as may be fixed by law. 

Sec. 4. All elections shall be by ballot, 
and a majority of all the votes given shall 
be necessary to constitute a choice. When 
there are more than two candidates for 
any office, the lowest of such candidates, 
at each ballot, after the first, shall be 
dropped, and all votes that may be given 
for such candidate or candidates thereafter, 
shall not be counted. In the event of a 
tie between two candidates for the same 
office, for two successive ballotings, the 
election shall be decided by lot. 

ARTICLE IV. DUTIES OF GRAND OFFICERS. 

Section 1. The G. C. shall have and exer- 
cise a general supervision of the Order in 
the State of Indiana. He shall preside at 
all meetings of the Grand Council, at 
which he may be present, preserve order, 
and cause the Constitution and Laws to be 



strictly observed. His decision on all 
points not provided for in the Constitution 
or General Laws, shall be conclusive, unless 
reversed by the Grand Council of Indiana, 
or the S. G. C. of the United States, upon 
appeal thereto. He shall give the casting 
vote, in case of an equal division, upon all 
questions arising in the Grand Council, ex- 
cept on appeals from his own decision; and 
in all elections of officers, he shall be enti- 
tled to vote only as other members. He 
shall not be entitled to participate in any 
discussions in the Grand Council, except in 
committee of the whole, or upon questions 
of order and appeals from his decision. He 
shall sign all orders drawn on the Grand 
Treasurer, and all other documents which 
may require his signature. He shall fill all 
official vacancies not otherwise provided 
for. He shall appoint all committees, ex- 
cept when the nomination and appoint- 
ment thereof shall be reserved by the 
Grand Council. He shall have power and 
authority to grant dispensations for confer 
ring degrees in the institution of new Tem- 
ples, and for the purpose of qualifying 
officers thereof, during the first six months; 
and for all other matters unprovided ior, 
wherein immediate action is necessary. 
He shall have power to call special meet- 
ings of theGrand Council, orof any subordin- 
ate Temple, whenever he may deem it ne- 
cessary for the good of the Order so to do. 
He shall, from time to time, give informa- 
tion, etc. 

Sec. 2. The Dep. G. C. shall assist the 
G. C, and in his absence perform his du- 
ties. 

Sec. 3. The Grand Secretary shall keep a 
journal of the proceedings of this body, 
and money accounts, shall receive all 
moneys and pay the same to the Treasurer, 
taking his receipt therefor. He shall attest 
all dispensations granted, and commissions 
issued, by theG. Commander. He shall trans- 
mit an annual report of the state of the order 
in Indiana, to theS. G. C. of the United States, 
in such form as the said S. G. C. may direct. 
He shall receive all documents for the G. 
G, and immediately submit the same to the 
G Commander. He shall, under the super- 
vision of the G. Com., conduct the corre- 
spondence of the G. C. He shall, when so 
directed, summon the Representatives to 
attend its special meetings. He shall pre- 
pare and procure the signatures of the offi- 
cers to all charters that may be granted by 
the G. C. He shall, whenever notified, 
attend any committee of the Grand Coun- 
cil, and furnish such official papers and doc- 
uments as may be required. He shall have 
the custody of the Grand Seal, and iierform 
such other duties as may be prescribed in 
this Constitution, or the Laws of the Grand 
Council. He shall receive for his services, 
annually, the sum of eight hundred dollars; 
and shall give such bond and secuiity for 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



313 



the faithful performance of his duties, as 
the Grand Council may require. 

Sec. 4. The G. Treasurer shall have charge 
of the funds, and all other property or evi- 
dence of title belonging to, or held in trust 
by the Grand Council, which may be placed 
in his hands. He shall keep correct ac- 
counts of all moneys which he may receive 
from the G. Secretary, and from all other 
sources, and pay all orders drawn upon the 
funds in his hands, by the Grand Com- 
mander, when attested by the G. Secretary. 
He shall, whenever notified, attend any 
committee of the Grand Council, and 
furnish such books and papers in his posses- 
sion as may be required. At the expiration 
of his term of office, or after resignation 
thereof, or removal therefrom, he shall 
make full settlement with the Finance 
Committee, and deliver to his successor in 
office, all moneys, books, bonds, vouchers 
and documents, and property, belonging to, 
or held in trust by the Grand Council, which 
may be in his possession. Before entering 
upon his duties, he shall give such bond 
and security as may be required by the 
Grand Council. 

Sec. 5. Other appointed officers shall 
perform the ordinary duties of their. offices, 
as prescribed by custom or law. 

Sec. 6. Any amendment to this Constitu- 
tion may be made at any regular meeting 
of this G. C, by giving one day's notice, in 
writing, and receiving a majority vote of the 
members present. 

Sec. 7. All elective officers shall take the 
following prescribed oath of office before 
entering upon their duties, viz. : 

OMcial Oath. 



I, , having been elected by 

to the office of in , do, in the 

presence of God and these witnesses, 
solemnly swear to maintain the Constitu- 
tion and Laws of this Order ; obey all right- 
ful orders emanating from superior author- 
ity, and to perform the duties which have 

been devolved upon me, as , to the 

best of my ability, so help me God. 

RULES OF ORDER. 

1st. When the presiding officer takes the 
chair, the officers and members shall take 
their respective seats; and at the sound of 
the gavel there shall be a general silence, 
under the penalty of a public reprimand. 

2d. The business of the annual meetings 
shall be taken up in the following order : 

Temple opened ; 

Officers' roll called ; 

Minutes of last stated and intervening 
nieetings read and passed upon; 

Certificates of members; 

Reports of Temples ; 

Reports of Committees ; 

Unfinished business ; 

New business. 



3d. The presiding officer shall preserve 
order and decorum, and pronounce the de- 
cision of the Temple on all subjects; he 
may speak to points of order in preference 
to other members, rising from his seat for 
that purpose; he shall decide questions of 
order without debate, unless entertaining 
doubts on the point, subject to an appeal to 
the Temple by any two membei's, on which 
appeal no member shall speak more than 
once. 

4th. No member shall disturb another in 
his speech, unless to call him to order, nor 
stand up to interrupt him, nor when a mem- 
ber is speaking, pass between him and the 
chair, or leave the hall. 

5th. Every member when he speaks shall 
rise and respectfully address the chair, and 
when he has finished shall sit down. Mem- 
bers speaking shall confine themselves to 
the question under debate, and avoid all 
personality or indecorous language, as well 
as any reflection upon the Temple or its 
members. 

6th. If two or more members rise to 
speak at the same time, the chair shall de- 
cide which is entitled to the floor. 

7 th. No member shall speak until he has 
been recognized by the chair. 

8th. No member shall speak more than 
once on the same subject or question, until 
all the members, wishing to speak, shall 
have had an opportunity to do so, nor more 
than twice without permission of the T. 

9th. If a member, while speaking, be 
called to order by the chair, he shall cease 
speaking, and take his seat until the 
question of order is determined, and per- 
mission is given him to proceed. 

10th. No motion shall be subject to de- 
bate until it shall have been seconded, and 
stated by the chair, and it shall be reduced 
to writing if desired by any member. 

11th. When a question is before the T., 
no motion shall be received except for ad- 
journment — the previous question — to lie 
on the table — to postpone indefinitely — to 
postpone to a certain time — to divide — to 
commit or amend; which motions shall 
severally have preference in the order here- 
in arranged. 

12th. On the call of five members, the 
previous question shall be put. The pre- 
vious question having been ordered, all 
further amendments and debates shall be 
precluded, but the amendments that have 
been previously offered shall be voted upon 
in their order before the main question. 

13th. When- a blank is to be filled, and 
different sums, numbers, or times shall be 
proposed, the question shall first be taken 
upon the highest sum or number, and long- 
est or latest time. 

14th. No motion for reconsideration shall 
be received unless moved by a member 
who voted in the majority in the first in- 
stance. 



314 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



15 th. Any member may excuse himself 
from serving on any committee at the time 
of his appointment, if he is then a member 
of one other committee. 

16th. The person first named on a com- 
mittee shall act as chairman thereof until 
another is chosen by themselves. 

17th. The consequences of a measure may 
be reprobated in strong terms; but to ar- 
raign the motives of those who propose or 
advocate it, is a personality and against order. 

18th. While the chair is putting a ques- 
tion or addressing the Temple, or whilst 
any other member is speaking, no member 
shall walk about or leave the Temple, or 
entertain private discourse. 

]9th. No motion can be made by one 
member while another is speaking ; and no 
motion can be made without rising and ad- 
dressing the chair. 

20th. The chair, or any member, doubting 
the decision of the question, may call for a 
division of the Temple, and a count of the 
affirmative and negative vote. 

21st. All reports of committees shall be 
made in writing. 

22d. Should any committee be appointed 
at one session of the Grand Council, to re- 
port at the next succeeding session, it shall 
be the duty of such committee to report in 
writing, even though they be not Represen- 
tatives. 

23d. Any member has a right to protest, 
and to have his protest spread upon the 
journal. — C. 3f. 

24th. Motions for adjournment, the pre- 
vious question, to lie on the table, and to post- 
pone indefinitely, shall be put without de- 
bate. 

25th. Any of these rules may be dis- 
pensed with by a vote of two-thirds of the 
members present. 



CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE 
S. G. C. 

Section 1. This organization shall be 
known as the S. L. 

Sec. 2. Its object and purposes are the 
maintenance of constitutional freedom and 
State rights, as recognized and established 
by the founders of our Eepublic. 

Sec. 3. The system of government of this 
order shall be vested in a Supreme Council 
of the States, a Grand Council of each 
State, and Parent and Branch Temples of 
each county. 

Sec. 4. The officers of the Supreme Coun- 
cil shall consist of a Supreme Commander, 
Secretary of State of the Order, Treasurer, 
and Clerk of the Council, who shall be an- 
nually elected by the Supreme Council, on 
the twenty-second day of February, and 
phall hold tlieir offices until their successors 
are duly elected and qualified. 

Sec. 5. Tlie Supreme Council shall be 



composed of the Grand Commanders of the 
several States and two delegates, who shall 
be annually elected by the Grand Councils 
of the respective States. Each delegate 
shall be entitled to one vote, and when a 
full delegation is not in attendance, those 
present may cast the entire vote of the 
State, and in all cases of a tie the presiding 
officer shall have the casting vote. 

Sec. 6. The Supreme Council shall meet on 
the twenty-second day of February, of each 
year, at such place as may be designated. 

Sec. 7. The Supreme Commander or three 
Grand Commanders of States, may call 
special sessions of the Supreme Council, at 
such times and places as he or they may 
d«em expedient. 

Sec. 8. The Supreme Commander shall 
take an oath to observe and maintain the 
principles of the order, before entering 
upon the duties of his office, said oath to 
be prescribed by law. He s-hall be the pre- 
siding officer to the Supreme Council, and 
charged with the execution of all laws en- 
acted by it. He shall be commander-in- 
chief of all military forces belonging to the 
order, in the various States, when called 
into actual service. He shall deliver a 
message to each meeting of the Supreme 
Council, showing the condition of the order, 
and such recommendations as its interest 
may demand. 

Sec. 9. The Deputy Supreme Commander, 
in case of death, absence, or resignation of 
the Supreme Commander, shall exercise all 
the powers and perform all the duties per- 
taining to said office ; shall take the same 
oath of office, and be chairman of the Com- 
mittee on Military Aflfairs. 

Sec. 10. The Secretary of State of the 
Order shall be the chairman of the Com- 
mittee on the State of the Order; shall 
conduct all official correspondence of the 
Supreme Council, and be the medium of 
communication between the State and Su- 
preme Councils ; he shall ascertain and 
report at each annual meeting of the Su- 
preme Council, the condition of the order 
in each State, and make such recommenda- 
tions as he-may deem proper. 

Sec. 11. The Treasurer shall be under 
such regulations as may be prescribed by 
law; shall be the custodian of all funds 
belonging to the Supreme Council ; shall 
pay all orders drawn upon him by the Clerk 
and countersigned by the Supreme Com- 
mander, or chairman of the Auditing Com- 
mittee, and make, at each meeting, reports 
showing the financial condition of the 
order, and such recommendations as he 
may deem expedient. 

Sec. 12. All elections shall be by ballot, 
and a majority of all the votes cast shall be 
necessary to a choice ; Provided, That where 
there is but one candidate, the election 
may be viva voce. 

Sec 13. That the Supreme Commander 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



315 



administer the oath to all officers; and 
Councilors take the oath at the Clerk's 

GENERAL LAWS. 

Section 1. A quorum of the Supreme 
Council shall consist of a majority of the 
States, in which State Councils shall have 
been established. 

Sec. 2. Delegates from Territorial Councils 
shall be entitled to a seat and a right to 
speak in the Supreme Council, but no vote. 

Sec. 3. The ordinance or constitution of 
the Supreme Council shall be read at the 
opening of each session, and to all new del- 
egates. * 

Sec. 4. It shall be the duty of the Clerk 
to count and announce all votes of the 
Council, as well when taken by count, as 
by States or ballot. 

CONDITION OF THE ORDER AND REVENUES. 

Sec. 5. The Secretaries of the various 
State Councils are required to report to the 
Secretary of the Supreme Council, during 
the month of January of each year, for his 
report at the annual sessions, the number 
of brothers in the order, in their respective 
States, and also the condition of their treas- 
uries. 

Sec. 6. The Treasurer of each State Coun- 
cil shall pay over to the Treasurer of the 
Supreme Council, in January of each year, 
such sums as may be assessed upon them 
by the Supreme Council, based upon esti- 
mates of the Finance Committee. 

Sec. 7. The Standing Committee upon 
Finance shall be nominated by the Su- 
preme Commander, and confirmed by a 
vote of two-thirds of the Supreme Council 
at each annual session ; and the two mem- 
bers unprovided for in the Supreme Ordi- 
nance, of each of the Committees on the 
State of the Order and Finance, shall be 
appointed and confirmed in like manner. 
These committees shall report and recom- 
mend at each annual and extra session. 

EXTENSION OF THE ORDER. 

Sec. 8. For the purpose of extending the 
Order into States and Territories, where it 
does not now exist, it is hereby declared 
that full authority for this purpose, is vested 
in the Supreme Commander, or duly quali- 
fied Supreme Councilors in the following 
manner, viz. : They may, at the instance of 
five good men, in any State or Territory, in- 
stitute County Temples, and when a suffi- 
cient number of such County Temples have 
been instituted, they may establish a State 
Council, the duly elected delegates of which 
shall be admitted to this Supreme Council 
upon an equality with the organized States 
or Territories. 

FINANCE COMMITTEE. 

Sec. 9. It shall be the duty of the Fi- 
nance Committee, at each meeting, to audit 
all accounts which shall be presented, and 



to examine the books and accounts of the 
Clerk and Treasurer, and report to the 
Supreme Council 

MILEAGE AND PER DIEM. 

Sec. 10. That for the purpose of defraying 
the expenses of delegates to the Supreme 
Council, it is hereby left to each State 
Grand Council to fix, determine, and pay in 
the manner and to the extent that such 
State may determine. 

Sec. 11. That the Treasurer of the Su- 
preme Countil shall, before entering upon 
the duties of his office, take the oath re- 
quired, and give bond in a sum double the 
amount of funds likely to come into his 
hands. 

Sec 12. The Clerk of the Supreme Coun- 
cil shall keep an accurate journal of all its 
proceedings, draw orders on the Treasurer 
for all claims that are presented and prop- 
erly audited by the Finance Committee; 
collect all dues from the States, receipt for 
and pay the same over to the Treasurer, 
and preserve and keep all records and 
papers belonging to the Council. 

Sec. 13. All laws and resolutions of the 
Supreme Council shall be signed by the 
Clerk, countersigned by the Supreme Com- 
mander, and attested by the seal of the 
order. 

Sec 14. The Standing Committees of the 
Supreme Council shall consist of a Commit- 
tee on Finance, a Committee on the State 
of the Order, and a Committee on Military 
Aflairs. 

Sec 15. Delegates to the Supreme Coun- 
cil, before entering upon the duties of their 
office, shall take an oath to support and 
maintain the principles of the order. 

Sec. 16. The government of the order in 
the States shall be vested in a Grand Coun- 
cil, composed of not less than one delegate 
from each county, and a Grand Commander 
and Deputy Grand Commander, elected by 
said Councils, in such manner as they may 
provide. 

Sec 17. The Grand Commanders shall be 
the presiding officers of the Grand Councils 
of the States, execute all laws passed by 
such Councils, and shall be commanders-in- 
chief of the military forces of their respec- 
tive States. 

Sec 18. This Constitution shall be the 
supreme law of the order, and may be 
amended by a two-thirds vote of the Su- 
preme Council. 



PROCEEDITsTO-S 

OF THE 

GEAND COUNCIL OP THE STATE OP INDIANA, 

At their Meeting, held on the IGth and 11th of Feb., ISGi. 

The within proceedings are published in 
compliance with the following resolution : 

'• JResolved, That the Grand Secretary pre- 
pare and publish, in pamphlet form, the 



816 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



address of the Grand Commander, with 
such part of the proceedings of the Grand 
Council, as may be necessary for the infor- 
mation of the County Temples, and send 
one copy of said publication to each County 
Temple." 

CouN'ciLORS : For the honor you have done 
me. in fixing a time to hear my views and 
suggestions in relation to this organization, 
and general matters, I feel duly sensible, 
and am only sorry that I am so illy pre- 
pared to meet your expectations. 

We are organized for a high and noble 
purpose, the erection and consecration of 
Temples to the service of true Republican- 
ism; altars upon which we may lay our 
hands and hearts with the invocation, "God 
of our Fathers." Well may we call upon 
the God of truth, justice, and human 
rights, in our efforts to preserve what the 
great wisdom and heroic acts of our fathers 
achieved. 

This, my friends, is no small undertak- 
ing — requiring patience, fortitude, patriot- 
ism, and a self-sacrificing disposition from 
each and all, and may require us to hazard 
life itself, in support and defense of those 
great cardinal principles which are the 
foundation stones of the State and Federal 
Governments. It is the boast of those who, 
for long centuries, have fostered and kept 
alive brotherly love and mutual protection, 
among, not only the civilized, but in some 
degree the semi-barbarous nations of the 
earth, that they have attained now apparent 
great results, through trials, tribulationa, 
long suffering and persecutions. So, too, 
the worshipers of God, be they Jew or Gentile, 
claim to more distinctly merit an identity 
and name, in consequence of the immi- 
nent perils and innumerable conflicts, which 
have been thrown in their way to impede 
their progress. So may we, and doubtless 
will, point with pride to our present troubles, 
in the future, to prove our great worth. 
This great brotherhood is entitled now to 
the respect of mankind, for the part it en- 
acted in the period anterior to the Revolu- 
tion of 1776. Through it the Diiclaration 
was made, and the independence of the 
States achieved. This alone would endear it 
to every patriot heart, to every lover of re- 
publican institutions; if its history should 
stop here, when its operations were sus- 
pended, it were certainly enough — but still 
more glorious, superlatively brilliant, will 
be its history, when reinstated as it now is, 
it shall restore to this great people their 
Jire.'dde rights, a pure elective franchise, and an 
uyitrammeled judiciary; when fanatical usurp- 
ers and would-be tyrants and dictators are 
swept away with the rubbish that has been 
tlirovvn to the surface in these extraordin- 
ary times ; when once more the governing 
principle shall be the will of the governed 
expressly declared; when no more power 
ehall be exercised than is or has beijii de- 



rived from the people, the legitimate source 
of all power. 

The great principle now in issue, is the 
centralization of power, or the keeping it 
diffused in State sovereignty, as it is by the 
organic laws, constituting States and form- 
ing the General Government. 

The creation of an empire, or republic, or 
the reconstruction of the old Union, by V 
brute force, is simply impossible. The lib- 
eration of four million blacks, and putting 
them upon an equality with the whites, is a 
scheme which can only bring its authors 
into shame, contemjjt and confusion. iS^o 
results of this enterprise will ever be real- 
ized beyond the army of occupation. 

It is not the part of wisdom, for those 
who have in hand the noble work of pre- 
serving the States from ruin, and the races 
from intermixture, to base their action ujDon 
any incident or accident, or upon any sup- 
posed termination of our present troubles. 
He who changes his views upon victory or 
defeat, is but a poor soldier for a long cam- 
paign against the mass of error, corruption 
and crime, now thickly spread over and 
through the body politic, and to an alarm- 
ing extent influencing the action of the 
American mind. 

But, shall we stand aloof from political 
alliances, and seek in our own way to assist 
in the needful reformation ? Shall we rely 
entirely upon ourselves ? By no means — 
when the great end in view can be in the 
least degree promoted, we should not hesi- 
tate to lend our aid and support; but care ' 
should be taken that no uncertain path, or 
devious ways, be entered upon. 

Let me speak plain — our political affinity 
is unquestionably with the Democratic 
party, and if that organization goes boldly 
to the work, standing firmly upon its time- 
honored principles, maintaining vmsullied 
its integrity, it is safe to presume that it 
will receive the moral and physical support 
of this wide extended association. 

The great boast of the Democratic party 
has been, that it has met and beaten back 
the party of centralization, since the forma- 
tion of the Union ; and, although it has 
never ordained any principles in regard to 
the status of the inferior races, it has at all 
times strictly adhered to the doctrine of 
making it a purely local matter, and leaving 
to the States, by the exercise of their re- 
served powers, to regulate it as a domestic 
institution; the maintainance of this doc- 
trine, in its intendment and general opera- 
tions, must be satisfactory to the entire 
brotherhood. Let no one say we will thus 
be subservient to a party; rather will we be 
subservient to the demands of our countrj', 
and the cause in which we have enlisted. 

There need be no apprehension that a 
war of coercion will be continued by a Dem- ^ 
ocratic administration, if placed in control 
of public aftairs, for with the experience of 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



317 



the present one, ■which has for three years, 
with the unhmitecl resources of eighteen 
millions of people, in men, money and ships, 
won nothing but its own disgrace, and prob- 
>j able downfall, it is not likely that another, 
if it values public estimation, will repeat 
the experiment. 

Neither have we any reason to fear that 
the Democratic party, in shaping the can- 
vass of 1864, will go out of its way to insult 
five hundred thousand of those whose 
votes are necessary to its success; let us 
rather incline to the belief that all the ele- 
ments of opposition can and will be united, 
with no sacrifice of principle or manhood, 
to crush out this one now in power. 

A mere change of men will avail nothing, 
without corresponding action. Men, states- 
men, and executive ofl&cers, exhort people 
to patience and long suft'ering, and while 
condemning Federal usurpation, yield obe- 
dience to all its demands. In the estima- 
tion of the membership of tkis organization, 
such men and such governors, be they of 
what party they may, must be regarded as 
enemies to good government. I trust I 
may be pardoned if I give a few examples 
to illustrate. 

If this people can not excuse the Federal 
Executive for exercising undue and unwar- 
ranted power, toward breaking down their 
rights, derived from the force of their State 
Governments, how shall they palliate the 
oifense of Governor Seymour, in violating 
his obligations in allowing it to be done in 
the great State of New York ? This Gover- 
nor becomes accessory after the fact, and is 
alike worthy of public condemnation. Do 
you tell me it is a necessity to thus sub- 
serve the Washington usurpers ? In God's 
name, do not tell me that it is a necessity 
to be forsworn, to violate the plainest pro- 
visions of the Constitution, to consign a 
people to a slavish subserviency to the will 
of one man. You may tell me that itis rather 
a necessity to give up place, aye, to give up 
life itself. Because the punishment of 
these crimes against law and the people, 
being impeachment, and lodged with legis- 
lative bodies, that will not execute it, they 
are nevertheless offenses, and will be so ad- 
judged hereafter, when healthy restraints 
of law shall be demanded to protect life 
and property. 

The Democracy of Indiana, too, has made 
a culprit of itself. A Senator, by the mean 
and contemptible action of a majority of 
the United States Senate, was wrongfully 
and maliciously expelled from his seat. The 
Legislature plainly acquiesced in this insult 
to the State and the party, by refusing to 
return him again. Again, our cherished 
Vallandigham resides in exile, not so much 
by the power of Lincoln, as the demands of 
those who are controlling, or did control 
the Democratic party in that State. 

These things are of the past, shall they 



be repeated in the future ? The great fear 
is, that they will be, so long as this bugbear 
of civil war shall continue to horrify other- 
wise sensible people. My advice to you is, 
look well to the selection of men, upon 
whom you devolve the functions of leaders. 
This is no time to put forward men who 
take counsel of their fears. 

Will the exercise of an undoubted right, 
an inalienable, an inherited, a constitutional 
right, lead to conflict? Will opposition to 
usurpers, to dictators, to tyrants, who have 
broken down the safeguards of life and 
property, lead to it? Then there is no es- 
cape, save in dishonor, and the most potent 
argument in favor of the permanency and 
spread of this association lies in the fact, 
that there are men who desire place and 
those who desire peace and quiet upon such 
terms. But who will bring conflict ? Who 
will commence hostilities? Certainly not 
those who are merely claiming their rights? 
The conflict must then be commenced by 
those who are in the wrong. Must a people, 
therefore, continue to abase themselves, to 
keep those whom they have placed in author- 
ity from committing outrages upon them ? 
This is the strange logic of the times. 

This organization is based upon the prin- 
ciple of conserving the government inaugu- 
rated by the people, and bound to oppose all 
usurpations of power. Now it so happens 
that in the seventh year of its re-estabksh- 
ment, we find our State and Federal Gov- 
ernment overturned. Yes, 'tis true. Lin- 
coln's government is an usurpation — Mor- 
ton's government is an usurpation. Now I 
know not what others may do, but for my- 
self, I am willing the ballot box shall decide 
who shall be the ofiicers, under the law and 
Constitution; but I shall obey them only so 
far as they exercise their delegated powers. 
I will not agree to remain passive, under 
usurped authority, afiecting my rights and 
liberties. 

Now, if the present condition can be 
changed by the ballot, all will rejoice; but 
how will the ballot decide any thing, when 
the dominant party of the country appeal 
from it to force? No one will enter the con- 
test to overturn this party, more cheerfully 
than will I. But suppose it re-elects itself, 
will it return to the Constitution and laws? 
Are all those who do not agree with them 
to enter upon that delightful future, which 
has been so often and boastfully predicted 
by the Executive of this State, and many 
of his appointees ? That future to you and 
to me is death, confiscation of our property, "" 
starvation of our children, the forced mar- 
riage of our heirs to their new-made colored 
brethren in arms. 

If these men be prolonged in power, they 
must either consent to be content to exer- 
cise the power delegated by the people, or 
by the gods they must prove themselves 
physically the stronger. This position ia 



318 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



demanded by every true member of this 
fraternity, honor, life — aye, more than life, 
the virtue of our wives and daughters de- 
mand it ; and if you intend to make this 
organization of any practical value, you will 
do one of two things — either take steps to 
-i work the political regeneration of the party 
with which we are affiliated, up to this 
standard, or relying upon ourselves, deter- 
mine at once our plan of action. 

It might be asked now, shall men be 
coerced to go to war, in a mere crusade to 
free negroes, and territorial aggrandizement? 
Shall our people be taxed to carry forward 
a war of emancipation, miscegenation, con- 
fiscation, or extermination? 

It would be the happiest day of my life, 
if I could stand up with any considerable 
portion of my fellow men and say, "Not an- 
• other dollar, not another man, for this ne- 
farious war." But the views and suggestions 
of exiled Vallandigham will be of greater 
consequence to you than my own. He says 
to you, the only issue now is peace or loar. 
To the former he is committed, and can 
not, will not retract. He tells us not to 
commit ourselves to men. As well as he 
loves, and much as he admires the little 
hero McClellan, he would have the Chicago 
Convention act with un trammeled freedom. 
He reasons that the spring campaign will 
be more disastrous to the Federal armies 
than those heretofore made. That by July 
the increased call for troops, the certainty 
of a prolonged war, the rottenness of the 
financial system, defection* of border State 
troops, the spread and adoption of the 
principles of this organization, will all tend 
to bring conservative men to one mind. 

He anticipates that the deliberations of 
the Chicago Convention will no doubt be 
harmonious, and that its nominees will 
carry a majority of the adhering States — 
thinks that Government, by the one-tenth 
proclamation, will vote all seceded States, 
and overcome us ; and says if this northern 
people do not inaugurate the men thus 
duly and legally chosen, they will be want- 
ing in that manhood and spirit that should 
characterize freemen. He wishes it dis- 
tinctly understood, although pressed fi'om 
various quarters, that he will not consent 
to the use of his name before the conven- 
tion for a nomination, but thinks, in case 
we succeed, that he would be entitled to 
have a place in the cabinet, (may he get it, 
and not say like General Taylor, that he 
has "no friends to reward and no enemies 
to punish.") He counsels late action on 
the part of State conventions ; thinks Ohio 
is called too soon — advising that Indiana 
should have hers, say first of June. He 
finally judges that the Washington power 
will not yield up its power, until it is taken 
from them by an indignant people, by force 
of arms. He intimates that parties — men 
and interests — will divide into two classes, 



and that a conflict will ensue for the mas- 
tery. 

''^Sons of Liberty" arise! the day is rapidly 
approaching in the which you can make 
good your promises to your countrj'. The 
furnace is being heated that will prove 
your sincerity — the hour for daring deeds 
is not distant — let the watchword be on- 
ward! And let the result bless mankind 
with Eepublican Government, in this, our 
beloved land, to their latest posterity. 

Your Committee on Platform, having had 
the subject of a platform to govern the ac- 
tion of the various Covmcils of the State of 
Indiana, beg leave to report the following, 
which they recommend be adopted by this 
Grand Council: 

Whereas, A crisis has arisen in the his- 
tory of the Federal Government in relation 
to the rights of the States, whether delega- 
ted or reserved; the manifest usurpations 
of undelegated powers by the President ; 
the utter disregard of all Constitutional 
guarantees of liberty, looking constantly 
to the subjugation of the States and the 
establishment of a Centralized Despotism, 
already fill us with alarm for the cause of 
civil liberty in America. And whereas, it 
is due to those who difl'er with us in our 
notions of right, as well as the mode and 
measure of redress, to know where we 
stand, we propose to declare to them frankly 
our convictions and purposes in the pre- 
mises ; therefore, 

Resolved, That the right to alter or abol- 
ish their Government, whenever it fails to 
secure the blessings of liberty, is one of the 
inalienable rights of the people, that can 
never be surrendered ; nor is the right to 
maintain a Government that does secure 
the blessings of liberty less sacred and in- 
alienable, therefore we declare that patriot- 
ism and manhood alike enjoin upon us re- 
sistance to usurpation as the highest and "^ 
holiest duty of freemen. 

2. That the necessity of amendments to 
the Articles of Confederation was suggested 
by a prevailing insurrection ; its provisions 
matured amidst the threatening elements of 
civil war, and the Constitution tendered to 
the thirteen sovereign and independent 
States by the wisdom of the age, and ac- 
cepted by them as a fortress around the 
liberties of the people, prescribing inflexi- 
ble limits to the powers of the Government 
in war as well as in peace, and no necessity, 
however great, can warrant its violation by 
any officer of the Government; and every 
such infraction should be rebuked by the 
sternest energy of our nature. 

3. That the great purpose of the Constitu- 
tion of the United States was the maintain- 
ance of the principles of civil liberty. The 
Union a means, formed in a spirit of mu- 
tual concession, can only be restored and 
perpetuated by an adherence to the princi- 



TKEASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



319 



pies upon which it was founded, the volun- 
tary consent of itsmembers, and a scrupulous 
observance of the rights of each other un- 
der the Constitution; and that "war is dis- 
y union, final, irretrievable." 

4. That while with just disdain we reject 
the epithet of "peace at any price" as a 
slander upon the true Democracy, and with 
instinctive promptness protest against the 
brutal doctrine of war for revenge, for plun- 
der, or the debasement of our race to the 
level of a negro, we do regard the restora- 
tion of peace to our country, ujjon an hon- 
orable adjustment of the issues involved in 
this unholy and unnatural war, without 
humiliation to either party, as rising above 
all other considerations, and that in pon- 
dering the terms of such settlement we 
will look only to the peace and welfare of 
our race. 

5. That whatever the theory of the pow- 
ers of the Federal Government to coerce a 
State to remain in the Union may be, war 
as a means of restoring the Union is a de- 

\j lusion, involving a fearful waste of human 
life, hopeless bankruptcy, and the speedy 
downfall of the Eepublic. Therefore we 
recommend a cessation of hostilities upon 
existing facts, and a convention of the 
sovereign States to adjust the terms of a 
peace with a view to the restoration of the 
Union, entire if possible; if not, so much 
and such parts as the affinities of interest 
and civilization may attract. 

6. That there is a point at which submis- 
sion merges the man in the slave, and re- 
sistance becomes a duty. Whether that 
point, in the history of the times, has ar- 
rived, may be debated ; but we will resist 
by force any attempt to abridge the elec- 
tive franchise, whether by introduction of 
illegal votes, under military authority, 
or the attempt by Federal officers to in- 
timidate the citizen by threats of oppres- 
sion. 

7. "We reiterate and affirm the Virginia 
and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798-99, as 
embodying the true exposition of the Con- 
stitution. 

8. That we will support and maintain the 
Constitution of the United States, and of the 
State of India-na, and of the laws enacted 
under the same, as passed by the proper legis- 
lative authorities, and as expounded by the 
proper judicial tribunals. 

9. That we will maintain, peaceably if we 
can, but forcibly if we must, the freedom 
of speech, the freedom of the press, the 
freedom oip the person from arbitrary and 
unlawful arrest, and the freedom of the 
ballot box, from the aggression and violence 
of every person or avithority whatsoever. 
And to these ends we hereby pledge to 
each other, and to our brethren throughout 
the United States and the State of Indi- 
ana, our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred 
honor. 



REPORT OF THE FINANeE COMMITTEE. 

To the Grand Council of Indiana : 

Your committee beg leave to submit to 
this honorable body the following report: 

It being of the greatest importance that 
the Grand Council be amply provided with 
the necessary means to meet the urgent de- 
mands upon it, at this i:>eriod of its organic 
existence, and that without sufficient funds 
in its treasury, no permanent or systematic 
organization of the State can be eft'ected, 
would first urge upon every Parent Temple, 
who has not already responded to the pre- 
vious assessment of $20 00, made by the 
Grand Council, on each county or Parent 
Temple, the necessity of meeting that de- 
mand without any further delay. And 
second, that in order to provide an annual 
fund for the use of this Grand Council, 
that each county or Parent Temple be re- 
quired to pay into the treasury of the 
Grand Council, on the first Monday in May, 
1864, and annually thereafter, until other- 
wise ordered by the Grand Council, for 
each member in the county who has re- 
ceived the first degree, the sum of twenty 
cents. This assessment to include all mem- 
bers of the Sons of Liberty in each county 
throughout the State, whether members of 
the Parent Temple or the subordinate Tem- 
ples throughout the townships. And they 
would recommend that the demands of 
the Supreme Council, on this Grand Coun- 
cil, be paid out of the funds to be provi- 
ded by the foregoing assessment. And 
they would also recommend that the 
Grand Treasurer be required to give bond 
in double the amount of money that may 
come into his possession, by virtue of his 
office, conditioned for the faithful per- 
formance of his duties — such bond to be 
given to the Grand Commander, on or be- 
fore the first day of May, 1864, and after- 
ward upon entering upon the duties of 
that office. 

REPORT OF THE GRAND SECRETARY. 

M. E. Grand Commander: 

In compliancewith the resolution adopted 
by this body, I beg leave to submit the fol- 
lowing report, showing the number of coun- 
ties in the State that are organized ; the 
number in process of organization, and 
the number of members in the organiza- 
tion, so far as I have received reports: 

Reports have been received from but 
seventeen counties. We have organized in 
the State forty-one counties, and have in 
process of organization ten additional coun- 
ties, leaving the number of counties yet to 
report their membership, thirty-four. 

Judging from the reports received, I 
place the membership in the State, at this 
time, at least 12,000, not including the 
membership in the other organizations in 
the State, that work conjunctly with us. The 



320 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



following is a summary of the reports re- 
ceived: Grant county reports 201 members 
and 6 branches; Clay county reports 194 
members and 3 branches ; Blackford coun- 
ty reports 50 members and no branches ; 
DeKalb county reports 34 members and no 
branches; Harrison county reports 615 mem- 
bers and 11 ^ranches; Marshall county re- 
ports 30 members and no branches; Wash- 
ington county reports 1,100 members and 
10 branches; Allen county reports 40 mem- 
bers and no branches; Brown county re- 
ports 322 members and 4 branches ; Wells 
county reports 51 members and no branches; 
Vigo county reports 500 members and 5 
branches; Fountain county reports 373 
members and 10 branches ; Sullivan county 
reports 600 members and 10 branches; Parke 
county reports 533 members and 7 branches; 
Marion county reports 75 members and 1 
branch; Vermillion county reports 135 
members and 3 branches; Vanderburg 
county reports 200 members and no branch- 
es. Showing a total membership, in the 
counties reporting, of 5,053. 

The above report does not include those 
counties from whom have been received in- 
telligence, unofficially, of their organiza- 
tion, which would perhaps increase the 
number of counties organized and in pro- 
cess of organization to — say sixty-one. 

The above reportis respectfully submitted. 

Resolved, That it is the instruction and 
advice of this Grand Council to the differ- 
ent temples of the State, that they proceed 
forthwith and perfect a thorough organiza- 
tion of their respective counties, and there- 
by prepare themselves to carry into effect 
any and every order of this ^ody. 

Resolved, That the delegates present, re- 
port the number of subscribers obtained, 



or that can be obtained for the Constitution- 
alist, the proposed organ of the order. 

Eeports on the above resolution gave as- 
surance that the subscription lists of the 
Constitutionalist should be immediately taken 
in hand; and that at least 10,000 subscri- 
bers could, and would be obtained. 

At this meeting of the Grand Council, 
thirty-one counties were represented, and 
there is no doubt, had it not been for 
the extreme cold, every organized county 
in the State would have been present 
through their delegates. 

The organization in this State is in its in- 
fancy, and when we reflect that we have 
succeeded in organizing, in the short space 
of six months, over one-half the counties 
in the State, and have a membership num- 
bering over 12,000, we have every reason to 
feel encouraged for the future. 

The organization is extending its influ- 
ence, popularity, and usefulness daily, and 
is already at work in the States of New 
York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, New 
Hampshire, Connecticut, Ohio, Indiana, 
Illinois, Michigan, Delaware, Maryland, and 
Missouri, and numbers in its membership 
many of the noblest and most devoted 
champions of civil and religious liberty, 
remaining in our unhappy and distracted 
country. 

In conclusion, it is urged upon our friends 
in the counties to work with untiring en- 
ergy for the purpose of thorough organi- 
zation. This is the first and only truly na- 
tional organization the Democratic and 
Conservative men of the country have 
ever attempted, and we are assured that 
through it, and it only, can the peace, har- 
mony and union of these States ever be 
restored. 



OFFICIAL REPORT 

OF THE 

JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL 

ON THE 

"ORDER OF AMERICAN KNIGHTS,' 

OR 

"SONS OF LIBE RT Y." 

A WESTERN CONSPIRACY IN AID OF THE SOUTHERN REBELLION, 

21 



REPORT. 



War Department, Bureau of Military Justice, ) 
Washington, D. C, October 8, 1864. J 

Hon. E. M. Stanton, Secretary of War : 

Sir: Having been instructed by you to 
prepare a detailed report upon the mass of 
testimony furnished me from difterent 
sources in regard to the Secret Associations 
and Conspiraciens against the Government, formed, 
principally in the Western States, by trai- 
tors and disloyal persons, I have now the 
honor to submit as follows : 

During more than a year past it has been 
generally known to our military authorities 
that a secret treasonable organization, affi- 
liated with the Southern rebellion, and 
chiefly military in its character, has been 
rapidly extending itself throughout the 
West. A variety of agencies, which will be 
specified herein, have been employed, and 
successfully, to ascertain its nature and ex- 
tent, as well as its aims and its results; and, 
as this investigation has led to the arrest in 
several States of a number of its prominent 
members as dangerous public enemies, it has 
been deemed proper to set forth in full the 
acts and purposes of this organization, and 
thus to make known to the country at large 
its intensely treasonable and revolution- 
ary spirit. 

The subject will be presented under the 
following heads : 

I. The origin, history, names, etc., of the 
order. 

II. Its organization and ofiBcers. 

III. Its extent and numbers. 

IV. Its armed force. 

V. Its ritual, oaths, and interior forms. 
VI. Its written principles. 
VII. Its specific purposes and operations. 
VIII. The witnesses and their testimony. 

I. — THE ORIGIN, HISTORY, NAMES, ETC., OP THE 
ORDER. 

This secret association first developed it- 
self in the West in the year 1862, about the 
period of the first conscription of troops, 
which it aimed to obstruct and resist. Orig- 
inally known in certain localities as the 
"Mutual Protection Society," the "Circle of 
Honor," or the "Circle," or "Knights of the 
Mighty Host," but more widely as the 
" Knights of the Golden Circle," it was sim- 
ply an inspiration of the rebellion, being 
little other than an extension among the 
disloyal and disaffected at the North of the 
association of the latter name, which had 
existed for some years at the South, and 
from which it derived all the chief features 
of its organization. 



During the summer and fall of 1863 the 
order, both at the North and South, under- 
went some modifications as well as a change 
of name. In consequence of a partial ex- 
posure which had been made of the signs 
and ritual of the "Knights of the Golden 
Circle," Sterling Price had instituted as its 
successor in Missouri a secret political asso- 
ciation, which he called the " Corps de Bel- 
gique," or "Southern League;" his principal 
coadjutor being Charles L. Hunt, of St. 
Louis, then Belgian Consul at that city, but 
whose exequatur was subsequently revoked 
by the President on account of his disloyal 
practices. The special object of the Corps 
de Belgique appears to have been to unite 
the rebel sympathizers of Missouri, with a 
view to their taking up arms and joining 
Price upon his proposed grand invasion of 
that State, and to their recruiting for his 
army in the interim. 

Meanwhile, also, there had been insti- 
tuted at the North, in the autumn of 1863^ 
by sundry disloyal persons — prominent 
among whom were Vallandigham and P. C. 
Wright, of New York — a secret order, in- 
tended to be general throughout the coun- 
try, and aiming at an extended influence 
and power, and at more positive results 
than its predecessor, and which was termed, 
and has since been widely known as the O. 
A. K., or '■'■Order of American Knights." 

The opinion is expressed by Colonel San- 
derson, Provost Marshal General of the De- 
partrnent of Missouri, in his official report 
upon the progress of this order, that it was 
founded by Vallandigham during his ban- 
ishment, and upon consultation at Rich- 
mond with Davis and other prominent trai- 
tors. It is, indeed, the boast of the order in 
Indiana and elsewhere, that its "ritual" 
came direct from Davis himself; and Mary 
Ann Pitman, formerly attached to the com- 
mand of the rebel Forrest, and a most in- 
telligent witness — whose testimony will be 
hereafter referred to — states positively that 
Davis is a member of the order. 

Upon the institution of the principal or- 
ganization, it is represented that the "Corps 
de Belgique" was modified by Price, and 
became a Southern section of the Order of 
American Knights, and that the new name 
was generally adopted for the order, both at 
the North and South. 

The secret signs and character of the 
order having become known to our military 
authorities, further modifications in the 
ritual and forms were introduced, and its 
name was finally changed to that of 0. S. L., 

323 



324 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



or "Order of the Sons of Liberty" or the 
"Knights of the Order of the Sons of Lib- 
erty." These later changes are represented 
to have been first instituted, and the new 
ritual compiled, in the State of Indiana, in 
May last, but the new name was at once 
generally adopted throughout the West, 
though in some localities the association is 
still better known as the " Order of Ameri- 
can Knights." 

Meanwhile, also, the order has received 
certain local designations. In parts of Illi- 
nois it has been called at times the "Peace 
Organization," in Kentucky the "Star Or- 
ganization," and in Missouri the "American 
Organization;" these, however, being ap- 
parently names used outside of the lodges 
of the order. Its members have also been 
familiarly designated as " Butternuts " by 
the country people of Illinois, Indiana, and 
Ohio, and its separate lodges have also fre- 
quently received titles intended for the 
public ear; that in Chicago, for instance, 
being termed by its members the " Demo- 
cratic Invincible Club," that in Louisville 
the "Democratic Reading Room," etc. 

It is to be added that in the State of New 
York, and other parts of the North, the se- 
cret political association known as the " Mc- 
Clellan Minute Gtiard" would seem to be a 
branch of the Order of American Knights, 
having substantially the same objects, to be 
accomplished, however, .by means expressly 
suited to the localities in which it is estab- 
lished. For, as the Chief Secretary of this 
association. Dr. R. F. Stevens, stated in June 
last to a reliable witness whose testimony 
has been furnished, "those who represent 
the McClellan interest are compelled to 
preach a vigorous prosecution of the war, 
in order to secure the popular sentiment 
and allure voters." 

II. — ITS ORGANIZATION AND OFFICERS. 

From printed copies, heretofore seized by 
the Government, of the Constitution of 
the Supreme Council, Grand Council, and 
County Parent Temples, respectively, of the 
Order of Sons of Liberty, in connection 
with other and abundant testimony, the 
organization of the order, in its latest form, 
is ascertained to be as follows : 

1. The government of the order through- 
out the United States is vested in a Supreme 
Council, of which the officers are a Supreme 
Commander, Secretary of State, and Treas- 

'urer. These officers are elected for one 
year, at the annual meeting of the Supreme 
Council, which is made up of the Grand 
Commanders of the several States ex officio, 
and two delegates elected fiom each State 
in which the order is established. 

2. The government of the order in a 
State is vested in a Grand Council, the offi- 
cers of which are a Grand Commander, 
Deputy Grand Commander, Grand Secre- 
tary, Grand Treasurer, and a certain num- 



ber of Major Generals, or one for each Mili- 
tary District. These officers also are elected 
annually by "representatives" from the 
county temples, each temple being en- 
titled to two representatives, and one addi- 
tional for each thousand members. This 
body of representatives is also invested with 
certain legislative functions. 

3. The parent temple is the organization 
of the order for a county, each temple be- 
ing formally instituted by authority of the 
Supreme Council, or of the Grand Council or 
Grand Commander of the State. By the 
same authority, or by that of the officers of 
the parent temple, branch or subordinate 
temples may be established for townships 
in the county. 

But the strength and significance of this 
organization lie in its -military character. The 
secret constitution of the Supreme Council 
provides that the Supreme Commander 
'• shall be commander-in-chief of all military forces 
belonging to the order in the various States ivhen 
called into actual service ;" and further, that the 
Grand Commanders " shall be commander-- 
in-chief of the military forces of their respective 
States." Subordinate to the Grand Com- 
mander in the State are the " Major Gener- 
als" each of whom commands his separate 
district and army. In Indiana the Major 
Generals are four in number. In Illinois, 
where the organization of the order is con- 
sidered most perfect, the members in each 
congressional district compose a "brigade," 
w'hich is commanded by a " brigadier gen- 
eral." The members of each county consti- 
tute a "regiment," with a "colonel" in com- 
mand, and those of each township form a 
" company." A somewhat similar system 
prevails in Indiana, where also each com- 
pany is divided into "squads" each with its 
chief — an arrangement intended to facili- 
tate the guerrilla mode of warfare in case of 
a general outbreak or local disorder. 

The " McClellan Minute Guard," as ajv 
pears from a circular issued by the Chief 
Secretary in New York in March last, is or- 
ganized upon a military basis similar to that 
of the order proper. It is composed of 
companies, one for each election district, 
ten of which constitute a " brigade," with 
a "brigadier general" at its head. The 
whole is placed under the authority of a 
"commander-in-chief" A strict obedience 
on the part of members to the orders of 
their superiors is enjoined. 

The first " Supreme Commander" of the 
order was P. C. Wright, of New York, edi- 
tor of the New York News, who was in May 
last placed in arrest and confined in Fort 
Lafayette. His successor in office was Val- 
landigham, who was elected at the annual 
meeting of the Supreme Council in Febru- 
ary last. Robert Holloway, of Illinois, is 
represented to have acted as Lieutenant 
General, or Deputy Supreme Commander, 
during the absence of Vallandigham from 



TREASON TfilALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



325 



the country. The Secretary of State chosen 
at the last election was Dr. Massey, of Ohio. 

In Missouri, the principal officers were 
Charles L. Hunt, Grand Commander, Chas. 
E. Dunn. Deputy Grand Commander, and 
Green B. Smith, Grand Secretary. Since 
the arrest of these three persons (all of 
whom have made confessions which will be 
presently alluded to), James A. Barrett has, 
as it is understood, officiated as Grand Com- 
mander. He is stated to occupy also the 
position of chief of staff to the Supreme 
Commander. 

The Grand Commander in Indiana, H. H. 
Dodd, is now on trial at Indianapolis by a 
military commission for " conspiracy against 
the Government," " violation of the laws of 
war," and other charges. The Deputy 
Grand Commander in that State is Horace 
Hefifren, and the Grand Secretary, W. M. 
Harrison. The Major Generals are W. A. 
Bowles, John C. Walker, L. P. Milligan, 
and Andrew Humphreys. Among the 
other leading members of the order in that 
State are Dr. Athon, State Secretary, and 
Joseph Ristine, State Auditor. 

The Grand Commander in Illinois is 

Judd, of Lewistown, and B. B. Piper, of 
Springfield, who is entitled " Grand Mission- 
ai'y " of the State, and designated also as a 
member of Vallandigham's staff, is one of 
the most active members, having been 
busily engaged throughout the summer in 
establishing temples and initiating mem- 
bers. .<! 

In Kentucky, Judge Bullitt, of the Court 
of Appeals, is Grand Commander, and, with 
Dr. U. F. Kalfus and W. R. Thomas, jailor 
in Louisville, two other of the most prom- 
inent members, has been arrested and con- 
fined by the militai'y authorities. In New 
York, Dr. R. F. Stevens, the chief secretary 
of the McClellan Minute Guard, is the 
most active ostensible representative of the 
order. 

The greater part of the chief and subor- 
dinate officers of the oi-der and its branches, 
as well as the principal members thereof, 
are known to the Government, and, where 
not already arrested, may regard them- 
selves as under a constant military surveil- 
lance. So complete has been the exposure 
of this secret league, that however fre- 
(juently the conspirators may change its 
names, forms, passwords, and signals, its 
true purposes and operations can not longer 
be concealed from the military authorities. 

It is to be remarked that the Supreme 
Council of the order, which annually meets 
on February 22, convened this year at New 
York city, and a special meeting was then 
appointed to be held at Chicago on July 
1, or just prior to the day then fixed for the 
convention of the Democratic party. This 
convention having been postponed to Au- 
gust 29, the special meeting of the Supreme 
Council was also postponed to August 27. 



at the same place, and was duly convened 
accordingly. It will be remembered that a 
leading member of the convention, in the 
course of a speech made before that body, 
alluded approvingly to the session of the 
Sons of Liberty at Chicago at the same 
time, as that of an organization in har- 
mony with the sentiment and projects of 
the convention. 

It may be observed, in conclusion, that 
one not fully acquainted with the true 
character and intentions of the order, might 
well suppose that, in designating its officers 
by high military titles, and in imitating in its 
organization that established in our armies, 
it was designed merely to render itself 
more popular and attractive with the 
masses, and to invest its chiefs with a cer- 
tain sham dignity; but when it is understood 
that the order comprises within itself a 
large army of well-armed men, constantly 
drilled and exercised as soldiers, and that 
this army is held ready, at any time, for 
such forcible resistance to our military au- 
thorities, and such active co-operation with 
the public enemy, as it may be called upon 
to engage in by its commanders, it will be 
perceived that the titles of tlie latter are 
not assumed for a mere purpose of dis- 
play, but that they are the chiefs of an 
actual and formidable force of conspirators 
against the life of the Government, and 
that their military system is, as it has been 
remarked by Colonel Sanderson, " the 
grand lever used by the rebel government 
for its army operations." 

III. ITS EXTENT AND NUMBERS. 

The "temples" or "lodges" of the order 
are numerously scattered through the 
States of Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Missouri, 
and Kentucky. They are also officially re- 
ported as established, to a less extent, in 
Michigan and the other Western States, as 
well as in New York, Pennsylvania, New 
Hampshire, Rhode Island, Connecticut, 
New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, and Ten- 
nessee. Dodd, the Grand Commander of 
Indiana, in an address to the members in 
that State of February last, claims that at 
the next annual meeting of the Supreme 
Council (in February, 1 SG5,) every State in the 
Union will be represented, and adds, ''this 
is the first and only true national organiza- 
tion the Democratic and Conservative men of 
the country have ever attempted." A pro- 
vision made in the constitution of the 
Council for a representation from the Terri- 
tories shows, indeed, that the widest exten- 
sion of the order is contemplated. 

In the States first mentioned, the order 
is most strongly centered at the following 
places, where' are situated its principal 
" temples." In Indiana, at Indianapolis 
and V^incennes ; in Illinois, at Chicago, 
Springfield and Quincy, (a large proportion 
of the lodgc-i in and about the latter place 



326 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Laving been founded by the notorious 
guerrUla chief, Jackman;) in Ohio, at Cin- 
cinnati, Dayton, and in Hamilton county 
(which is proudly termed by members "the 
South Carolina of the North;") in Missouri, 
at St. Louis; in Kentucky, at Louisville; 
and in Michigan, at Detroit, (whence com- 
munication was freely had by the leaders 
of the order with Vallandigham during 
his banishment, either by letters addressed 
to him through two prominent citizens and 
members of the order, or by personal inter- 
views at Windsor, C. W.) It is to be added 
that the regular places of meeting, as tflso 
the principal rendezvous and haunts of the 
members in these and less important places, 
are generally well known to the Govern- 
ment. 

The actual numbers of the order have, it 
is believed, never been ofBcially reported, 
and can not, therefore, be accurately ascer- 
tained. Various estimates have been made, 
by leading members, some of which are no 
doubt considerably exaggerated. It has 
been asserted by delegates to the Supreme 
Council of February last, that the number 
was there represented to be from eight 
hundred thousand to one million; but Val- 
landigham, in his speech last summer at 
Dayton, Ohio, placed it at five hundred 
thousand, which is probably much nearer 
the true total. The number of its mem- 
bers in the several States has been difterently 
estimated in the reports and statements of 
its officers. Thus, the force of the order in 
Indiana, is stated to be from seventy-five 
to one hundred and twenty-five thousand ; 
in Illinois, from one hundred to one hun- 
dred and forty thousand; in Ohio, from 
eighty to one hundred and eight thousand ; 
in Kentucky, from forty to seventy thou- 
sand; in Missouri, from twenty to forty 
thousand; and in Michigan and New York, 
about twenty thousand each. Its represen- 
tation in the other States above mentioned 
does not specifically aj^pear from the testi- 
mony; but, allowing for every exaggera- 
tion in the figures reported, they may be 
deemed to present a tolerably faithful view 
of what, at least, is regarded by the or- 
der as its true force in the States desig- 
nated. 

It is to be noted that the order, or its 
counterpart, is probably much more widely 
extended at the South even than at the 
North, and that a large proportion of the 
officers of the rebel army arc represented 
by credible witnesses to be members. In 
Kentucky and Missouri the order has not 
hesitated to admit as members, not only 
officers of that army, but also a considerable 
number of guerrillas, a class who might be 
supposed to appreciate most readily its 
spirit and purposes. It is fully shown that 
as lately as in July last, several of these 
ruffians were initiated into the first degree 
by Dr. Kalfus, in Kt ntucky. 



IV. — ITS ARMED FORCE. 

A review of the testimony in regard to 
the armed force of the order, will materially 
aid in determining its real strength and 
numbers. 

Although the order has from the outset 
partaken of the military character, it was 
not till the summer or fall of 1863 that it 
began to be generally organized as an 
armed body. Since that date its officers 
and leaders have been busily engaged in 
placing it upon a military basis, and in pre- 
paring it for a revolutionary movement. A 
general system of drilling has been insti- 
tuted and secretly cai'ried out. Members 
have been instructed to be constantly pro- 
vided with weapons, and in some localities 
it has been absolutely required that each 
member should keep at his residence, at all 
times, certain a^ras and a specified quan- 
tity of ammunition. 

In March last, the entire armed force of 
the order, capable of being mobilized for ef- 
fective service, was represented to be three 
hundred and forty thousand men. As the de- 
tails, upon which this statement was based, 
are imperfectly set forth in the testimony, it 
is not known how far this number may be 
exaggerated. It is abundantly shown, how- 
ever, that the order, by means of a tax levied 
upon its members, has accumulated consid- 
erable funds for the purchase of arms and 
ammunition, and that these have been 
procured in large quantities for its use. 
The witness Clayton, on the trial of Dodd, 
estimated that hoo-thirds of the order are 
furnished with arms. 

Green B. Smith, Grand Secretary of the 
order in Missouri, states in his confession 
of July last: "I know that arms, mostly 
revolvers and ammunition, have been pui-- 
chased by members in St. Louis, to send 
to members in the country where they 
could not be had;" and he subsequently 
adds that he himself alone clandestinely 
purchased and forwarded, between April 
15th and 19th last, about two hundred re- 
volvers, with five thousand percussion caps 
and other ammunition. A muster-roll of one 
of the country lodges of that State is exhibi- 
ted, in which, opposite the name of each 
member, are noted certain numbers, under 
the heads of "Missouri Republican," "St. 
Louis Union," "Anzeiger," "Miscellaneous 
Periodicals," " Books," "Speeches," and "Re- 
ports;" titles which, when interpreted, sev- 
erally signifj' single-barreled guns, double-bar- 
reled guns, revolvers, private ammunition, private 
lead, company powder, company lead — the roll 
thus actually setting forth the amount of 
arms and ammunition in the possession yf 
the lodge and its members. 

In the States of C»hio 'and Illinois the or- 
der is claimed, by its members, to be unvi- 
sually well armed with revolvers, carbines, 
etc.; but it is in regard to the arming of the 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



327 



order in Indiana that the principal statis- 
tics have been presented, and these may 
serve to illustrate the system which has 
probably been pursued in most of the 
States. One intelligent witness, who has 
been a member, estimates that in March 
last, there were in possession of the order 
in that State six thousand muskets and 
sixty thousand revolvers, besides private 
arms. Another member testifies that at a 
single lodge meeting of two hundred and 
fifty-two persons, which he attended early 
in the present year, the sum of $4,000 was 
subscribed for arms. Other members pre- 
sent statements in reference to the number 
of arms in their respective counties, and 
all agree in representing that these have 
been constantly forwarded from Indianapo- 
lis into the interior. Beck & Brothers are 
designated as the firm in that city, to 
which most of the arms were consigned. 
These were shipped principally from the 
East; some packages, however, were sent 
from Cincinnati, and some from Kentucky, 
and the boxes were generally marked 
"pick-axes," "hardware," "nails," "house- 
hold goods," etc. 

General Carrington estimates that in 
February and March last nearly thirty 
thousand guns and revolvers entered the 
State, and this estimate is based upon an 
actual inspection of invoices. The true num- 
ber introduced was, therefore, probably con- 
siderably greater. That officer adds, that on 
the day in which the sale of arms was 
stopped by his order, in Indianapolis, nearly 
one thousand additional revolvers had 
been contracted for, and that the trade 
could not supply the demand. He further 
reports that after the introduction of arms 
into the Department of the North had 
been prohibited in General Orders of March 
Last, a seizure was made by the Govern- 
ment of a large quantity of revolvers and 
one hundred and thirty-five thousand 
rounds of ammunition, which had been 
shipped to the firm in Indianapolis, of 
which H. H. Dodd, Grand Commander, was 
a member; that other arms about to be 
shipped to the same destination were seized 
in New York city; and that all these were 
claimed as the private property of John C. 
Walker, one of the Major Generals of the 
order in Indiana, and were represented to 
have been ^'■purchased for a few friends." 
It should also be stated that at the office 
of Hon. D. W. Voorhees, M. C, at Terre 
Haute, were discovered letters which dis- 
closed a correspondence between him and 
ex-Senator Wall, of New Jersey, in regard 
to the purchase of twenty thousand Gari- 
baldi rifles, to be forwarded to the West. 

It appears in the course of the testimony 
that a considerable quantity of arms and 
ammunition were brought into the State of 
Illinois from Burlington, Iowa, and that 
ammunition was sent from New Albany, 



Indiana, into Kentucky; it is also repre- 
sented that, had Vallandigham been ar- 
rested on his return to Ohio, it was con- 
templated furnishing the order with arms 
from a point in Canada, near Windsor, 
where they were stored and ready for use. 

There remains further to be noticed, in 
this connection, the testimony of Clayton 
upon the trial of Dodd, to the effect that 
arms were to be furnished the order from 
Nassau, N. P., by way of Canada; that, to 
defray the expense of these arms or then- 
transportation, a formal assessment was 
levied upon the lodges, but that the trans- 
portation into Canada was actually to be 
furnished by the Confederate authorities. 

A statement was made by Hunt. Grand 
Commander of Missouri, before his arrest, 
to a fellow member, that shells and all 
kinds of munitions of war, as well as infer- 
nal machines, were manufactured for the 
order at Indianapolis; and the late discov- 
ery in Cincinnati of samples of hand-gren- 
ades, conical shells, and rockets, of which 
one thousand were about to be manufac- 
tured, under a special contract, for the 
Order of the Sons of Liberty, goes directly 
to verify such a statement. 

These details will convey some idea of the 
attempts which have been made to place 
the order upon a war footing and prepare it 
for aggressive movements. But, notwith- 
standing all the efforts that have been put 
forth, and with considerable success, to arm 
and equip its members as fighting men, the 
leaders have felt themselves still very defi- 
cient in their armament, and numerous 
schemes for increasing their armed strength 
have been devised. Thus, at the time of 
the issuing of the general order in Missouri 
requiring the enrollment of all citizens, it 
was proposed in the lodges of the Order of 
American Knights, at St. Louis, that certain 
members should raise companies in the 
militia, in their respective wards, and thus 
get command of as many Government arms 
and equipments as possible, for the future 
use of the order. Again it was proposed 
that aU the members should enrol them- 
selves in the militia, instead of paying com- 
mutation, in this way obtaining possession 
of United States arms, and having the ad- 
vantage of the drill and military instruc- 
tion. In the councils of the order in Ken- 
tucky, in June last, a scheme was devised 
for disarming all the negro troops, which it 
was thought could be done without much 
difficulty, and appropriating their arms for 
military purposes. 

The despicable treachery of these pro- 
posed plans, as evincing the animns of the 
conspiracy, need not be commented upon. 

It is to be observed that the order in the 
State of Missouri has counted greatly upon 
support from the enrolled militia, in case of 
an invasion by Price, as containing many 
members and friends of the Order of Amer- 



328 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



ican Knights ; and that the " Paw-Paw 
Militia," a military organization of Bu- 
chanan county, as well as the militia of 
Platte and Clay counties, known as " Flat- 
Foots," have been relied upon, almost to a 
man, to join the revolutionary movement. 

V. — ^ITS RITUAL, OATHS, AND INTERIOR FORMS. 

The ritual of the order, as well as its secret 
signs, passwords, etc., has been fully made 
known to the military authorities. In Au- 
gust last one hundred and twelve copies of 
the ritual of the Order of American Knights 
were seized in the office of Hon. D. W. 
Voorhees, M. C, at Terre Haute, and a 
large number of rituals of the Order of the 
Sons of Liberty, together with copies of the 
constitutions of the councils, etc., already 
referred to, were found in the building at 
Indianapolis, occupied by Dodd, the Grand 
Commander of Indiana, as had been indi- 
cated by the Government witness and de- 
tective, Stidger. Copies were likewise dis- 
covered at Louisville, at the residence of 
Dr. Kalfus, concealed within the mattress 
of his bed, where Stidger had ascertained 
that they were kept. 

The ritual of the Order of American 
Knights has also been furnished by the au- 
thorities at St. Louis. From the ritual, that 
of the Order of the Sons of Liberty does 
not materially dift'er. Both are termed 
" progressive," in that they provide for five 
separate degrees of membership, and contem- 
plate the admission of a member of a lower 
degree into a higher one only upon certain 
vouchers and proofs of fitness, which, with 
each ascending degree, are required to be 
stronger and more imposing. 

Each degree has its commander or head ; 
the fourth or "grand" is the highest in a 
State; the fifth or "supreme" the highest 
in the United States; but to the first or 
lower degree only do the great majority of 
members attain. A large proportion of 
these enter the order, supposing it to be a 
"Democratic" and political association 
merely; and the history of the order fur- 
nishes a most striking illustration of the 
gross and criminal deception which may be 
practiced upon the ignorant masses by un- 
scrupulous and unprincipled leaders. The 
members of the lower degree are often for a 
considerable period kept quite unaware of 
the true purposes of their chiefs. But to the 
latter they are bound, in the language of 
tlieir obligation, '7o yield prompt and implicit 
obedience to the utmost of their ability, without re- 
monstrance, hesitation or delay" and meanwhile 
their minds, under the discipline and teach- 
ings to which they are subjected, become 
educated and accustomed to contemplate 
with comparative unconcern the treason for 
which they are preparing. 

The oaths, " invocations," " charges," etc., 
of the ritual, expressed as they are in bom- 
bastic and extravagant phraseology, would 



excite in the mind of an educated person 
only ridicule or contempt, but upon the 
illiterate they are calculated to make a deep 
impression, the efiect and importance of 
which were doubtless fully studied by the 
framers of the instrument. 

The oath which is administered upon the 
introduction of a member into any degree, 
is especially imposing in its language; it 
prescribes as a penalty for a violation of the* 
obligation assumed "a shameful death," and 
further, that the body of the person guilty 
of such violation shall be divided in four 
parts and cast out at the four "gates" of 
the temple. Not only, as has been said, 
does it enjoin a blind obedience to the com- 
mands of the superiors of the order, but it 
is required to be held of paramount obligation 
to any oath which may be administered to 
a member in a court of justice or elsewhere. 
Thus, in cases where members have been 
sworn by oflicers empowered to administer 
oaths to speak the whole truth in answer to 
questions that may be jDut to them, and 
have then been examined in reference to 
the order, and their connection therewith, 
they have not only refused to give any in- 
formation in regard to its character, but 
have denied that they were members, or 
even that they knew of its existence. A 
conspicuous instance of this is presented in 
the cases of Hunt, Dunn, and Smith, the 
chief officers of the order in Missouri, who, 
upon their first examination under oath, 
after their arrest, denied all connection 
with the order, but confessed, also under 
oath, at a subsequent period, that this de- 
nial was wholly false, although in accord- 
ance with their obligations as members. 
Indeed, a deliberate system of decei^tion in 
regard to the details of the conspiracy is 
inculcated upon the members, and stu- 
diously pursued; and it may be mentioned, 
as a similarly despicable feature of the or- 
ganization, that it is held bound to injure 
the Administration and officers of the Gov- 
ernment, in every possible manner, by mis- 
representation and falsehood. 

Members are also instructed that their 
oath of membership is to be held paramount 
to an oath of allegiance, or any other oath 
which may impose obligations inconsistent 
with those wliich are assvmied upon entei- 
ing the order. Thus, if a member, when in 
danger, or for the purpose of facilitating 
some traitorous design, has taken the oath 
of allegiance to the United States, he is 
held at liberty to violate it on the first occa- 
sion, his obligation to the order being 
deemed superior to any consideration of 
duty or loyalty prompted by such oath. 

It is to be added that where members are 
threatened with the penalties of perjury, in 
case of their answering falsely to questions 
propounded to them in regard to the order 
before a court or grand jury, they are in- 
structed to refuse to answer such questions, 



TREASON TRIALS AT IXDIAXAPOLIS. 



329 



alleging, as a ground foi* their refusal, that 
their answers may criminate themselves. 
The testimony shows that this course has 
liabitually been pursued by members, es- 
pecially in Indiana, when placed in such a 
situation. 

Besides the oaths and other forms and 
ceremonies which have been alluded to, the 
ritual contains what are termed " Declara- 
tions of Principles." These declarations, 
which are most important as- exhibiting the 
creed and character of the order, as inspired 
by the principles of the rebellion, will be 
fully presented under the next branch of 
the subject. 

The signs, signals, passivords, etc., of the 
order are set forth at length in the testi- 
mony, but need only be briefly alluded to. 
It is a significant fact, as showing the inti- 
mate relations between the Northeini and 
Southern sections of the secret conspiracy, 
that a member from a Northern State is en- 
abled to pass without risk through the South 
by the use of the signs of recognition which 
have been established throughout the order, 
and by means of which members from dis- 
tant points, though meeting as strangers, 
nre at once made known to each other as 
"brothers." Mary Ann Pitman expressly 
states in her testimony that whenever im- 
portant dispatches are required to be sent 
by rebel generals beyond their lines, mem- 
bers of the order are always selected to 
convey them. Certain passwords are also 
used in common in both sections, and of 
these, norte appears to be more familiar 
than the word " Nu-ol>lac," or the name 
'' Calhoun " spelt backward, and which is 
employed upon entering a temple of the 
first degree of the Order of American 
Knights — certainly a fitting password to 
such dens of treason. 

Beside the signs of recognition, there are 
signs of loarning and danger, for use at night, 
as well as by day ; as, for instance, signs to 
warn memljers of the approach of tfnited 
States officials seeking to make arrests. 
The order has also established what are 
called battle-signals, by means of which, as it 
is asserted, a member serving in the army 
may communicate with the enemy in the 
field, and thus escape personal harm in 
case of attack or capture. The most re- 
cent of these signals represented to have 
been adopted is a five-pointed copper star, 
worn under the coat, which is to be dis- 
closed upon meeting an enemy, who will 
thus recognize in the wearer a sympathizer 
and an ally. A similar star of German sil- 
ver, hung in a frame, is said to be numer- 
ously displayed by members or their fami- 
lies in private houses in Indiana, for the pur- 
pose of insuring protection to their property 
in case of a raid or other attack ; and it is 
stated that in many dwellings in that State 
a portrait of John Morgan is exhibited for 
a similar purpose. 



Other signs are used by members, and es- 
pecially the officers of the order in their 
correspondence. Their letters, when of an 
official character, are generally conveyed by 
special messengers, but wlien transmitted 
through the mail are usually in cipher. 
When written in the ordinary manner, a 
character at the foot of the letter, consist- 
ing of a cu-cle with a line drawn across the 
center, signifies to the member who receives 
it that the statements as written are to be 
understood in- a sense directly the opposite 
to that which would ordinai-ily be con- 
veyed. 

It is to be added that the meetings of the 
order, especially in the country, are gener- 
ally held at night and in secluded 23lfices ; 
and that the approach to them is carefully 
guarded by a line of sentinels, who are 
passed only by means of a special counter- 
sign, which is termed the "picket." 

VI. ITS WRITTEN PRINCIPLES. 

The " Declaration of Principles" which is 
set forth in the ritual of the order, has 
already been alluded to. This declaration, 
which is s^^eciall}'^ framed for the instruction 
of the great mass of members, commences 
with the following proposition : 

" All men are endowed by the Creator 
with certain rights, equal as far as there is 
equality in the capacity for the appreciation, 
enjoyment, and exercise of those rights." 
And subsequently there is added : " In the 
Divine economy no individual of the human 
race must be permitted to encumber the 
earth, to mar its aspects of transcendent 
beauty, nor to impede the progress of the 
physical or intellectual man, neither in 
himself nor in the race to which he belongs. 
Hence, a people, upon whatever jDlane they 
may be found in the ascending scale of hu- 
manity, whom neither the divinity within 
them nor the inspirations of divine and 
beautiful nature around them can impel to 
virtuous action and progress onward and 
upward, should be subjected to a just and 
humane servitude and tutelage to the supe- 
rior race until they shall be able to appre- 
ciate the benefits and advantages of civili- 
zation." 

Here, expressed in studied terms of hy- 
pocrisy, is the whole theory of human 
bondage — the right of the strong, because 
they are strong, to despoil and enslave the 
weak, because they are weak ! The lan- 
guages of earth can add nothing to the 
cowardly and loathsome baseness of the 
doctrine, as thus announced. It is the 
robber's creed sought to be nationalized, and 
would push back the hand on the dial 
plate of our civilization to the darkest 
periods of human history. It must be ad- 
mitted, however, that it furnishes a fitting 
"corner-stone" for the government of a re- 
bellion, every fiber of whose body and every 
; throb of whose soul is born of the traitor- 



330 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



OU8 ambition and slave-pen inspirations of 
the South. 

To these detestable tenets is added that 
other pernicious political theory of State sov- 
ereignty, with its necessary fruit, the mon- 
strous doctrine of secession — a doctrine 
which, in asserting that in our federative 
system a part is greater than the whole, 
would compel the General Government, 
like a Japanese slave, to commit hari-kari 
whenever a faithless or insolent State should 
command it to do so. 

Thus, the ritual, after reciting that the 
States of the Union are " free, independent, 
and sovereign," proceeds as follows: 

" The government designated ' The Uni- 
ted States of America' has no sovereignty, be- 
cause that is an attribute with which the 
people, in their several and distinct political 
organizations, are endowed, and is inalien- 
able. It was constituted by the terms of 
the compact, by all the States, through the 
express will of the people thereof, respec- 
tively — a common agent, to use and exer- 
cise certain named, specified, defined, and 
limited powei's which are inherent of the 
sovereignties within those States. It is per- 
mitted, so far as regards its status and re- 
lations, as common agent in the exer- 
cise of the powers carefullj^ and jealously 
delegated to it, to call itself 'supreme,' but 
not '■sovereign.' In accordance with the 
principles upon which is founded the Amer- 
ican theory, government can exercise only 
delegated power ; hence, if those who shall 
have been chosen to administer the gov- 
ernment shall assume to exercise powers 
not delegated, they should be regarded and 
treated as usurpers. The reference to 'in- 
herent power,' 'war power,' or 'military 
necessity,' on the part of the functionary 
for the sanction of an arbitrary exercise of 
power by him, we will not accept in pallia- 
tion or excuse." 

To this is added, as a corollary, " it is in- 
compatible with the history and nature of 
our system of government, that Federal 
authority should coerce by arms a sovereign 
State." 

The declaration of principles, however, 
do :s not stop here, but proceeds one step 
further, as follows: 

" Whenever the chosen officers or dele- 
gates shall fail or refuse to administer the 
Government in strict accordance with the 
letter of the accepted Constitution, it is the 
inherent right and the solemn and impera- 
tive duty of the people to resist the func- 
tionaries, and, if need be, to expel them by 
force of arms ! Such resistance is not revolu- 
tion, but is solely tlie assertion of right — the 
exercise of all the noble attributes which 
impart honor and dignity to manhood." 

To the same effect, though in a milder 
tone, is the platform of the order in Indi- 
ana, put forth by the Grand Council at 
their meeting in February last, which de- 



clares that " the right to alter or abolish 
their government, whenever it fails to se- 
cure the blessings of liberty, is one of the 
inalienable rights of the people that can 
never be surrendered." 

Such, then, are the principles which the 
new member swears to observe and abide 
by in his obligation, set forth in the ritual, 
where he says: "I do solemnly promise that 
I Avill ever cherish in my heart of hearts 
the sublime creed of the E. K., (Excellent 
Knights,) and will, so far as in me lies, 
illustrate the same in my intercourse with 
men, and will defend the principles thereof, 
if need be, with my life, whensoever as- 
sailed, in my own country first of all. I do 
further solemnly declare that I will never 
take up arms in behalf of any government 
which does not acknowledge the sole au- 
thority or power to be the will of the gov- 
erned." 

The following extracts from the ritual, 
may also be quoted as illustrating the prin- 
ciple of the right of revolution and resist- 
ance to constituted authority insisted upon 
by the order: 

"Our swords shall be unsheathed when- 
ever the great principles which we aim to 
inculcate and have sworn to maintain and 
defend are assailed." 

Again: "I do solemnly promise, that when- 
soever the principles which our order in- 
culcates shall be assailed in my own State or 
country, I will defend these principles with 
my sword and my life, in whatsoever capa- 
city may be assigned me by the competent 
authority of our order." 

And further: "I do promise that I will, 
at all times, if need be, take up arms in the 
cause of the oppressed — in my own coun- 
try first of all — against any power or gov- 
ernment usurped, which may be found in 
arms and waging war against the people or 
peoples who are endeavoring to establish, 
or have inaugurated, a government for 
themselves of their own free choice." 

Moreover, it is to be noted that all the 
addresses and speeches of its leaders 
breathe the same principle, of the right of 
the forcible resistance to the Government, 
as one of the tenets of the order. 

Thus P. C. Wright, Supreme Commander, 
in his general address of December, 1863, 
after urging that " the spirit of the fathers 
may animate the free minds, the brave 
hearts, and still unshackled limbs of the 
true democracy," (meaning the members of 
the order,) adds as follows: "To be prepared 
for the crisis now approaching, we must 
catch from afar the earliest and faintest 
breathings of the spirit of the storm; 
to be successful when the storm comes, we 
must be watchful, patient, brave, confident, 
organized, armed." 

Thus, too, Dodd, Grand Commander of 
the order in Indiana, quoting, in his ad- 
dress of February last, the views of his 



TREASON TRIALS AT ESTDIANAPOLIS. 



331 



chief, Vallandigham, and adopting them 
as his own, says: 

"He (Vallandigham) judges that the 
Washington power will not yield up its 
power until it is taken from them by an in- 
dignant people by force of arms." 

Such, then, are the written principles 
of the order in which the neophyte is in- 
structed, and which he is sworn to cherish 
and observe as his rule of action, when, 
with arms placed in his hands, he is called 
upon to engage in the overthrow of his 
Government. This declaration — first, of the 
absolute right of slavery; second, of State 
sovereignty and the right of secession; third, 
of the right of armed resistance to consti- 
tuted authority on the part of the dis- 
afifected and the disloyal, whenever their 
ambition may prompt thena to revolu- 
tion — is but an assertion of that abomin- 
able theory which, frona its first enuncia- 
tion, served as a pretext for conspiracy 
after conspiracy against the Government 
on the part of Southern traitors, until their 
detestable plotting culminated in open re- 
bellion and bloody civil war. What more 
appi'opriate password, therefore, to be com- 
municated to the new member upon his first 
admission to the secrets of the order could 
have been conceived, than that which was 
actually adopted — "Calhoun! " — aman who, 
baffled in his lust for power, with gnashing 
teeth turned upon the Government that 
had lifted him to its highest honors, and 
upon the country that had borne him, and 
down to the very close of his fevered life 
labored incessantly to scatter far and wide 
the seeds of that poison of death now upon 
our lips. The thorns which now pierce 
and tear us are of the tree he planted. 

VII. ITS SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND OPERATIONS. 

From the principles of the order, as thus 
set forth, its general purpose of co-operating 
with the rebellion may readily be inferred, 
and, in fact, those principles could logic- 
ally lead to no other result. This general 
purpose, indeed, is distinctly set forth in 
the personal statements and confessions of 
its members, and particularly of its prom- 
inent officers, who have been induced to 
make disclosures to the Government. 
Among the most significant of these con- 
fessions are those already alluded to, of 
Hunt, Dunn, and Smith, the heads of the 
order in Missouri. The latter, whose state- 
ment is full and explicit, says: "At the 
time I joined the order I understood that 
its object was to aid and assist the Confed- 
erate Government, and endeavor to restore 
the Union as it was prior to this rebellion." 
He adds: "The order is hostile in every re- 
spect to the General Government, and 
friendly to the so-called Confederate Gov- 
ernment. It is exclusively made up of dis- 
loyal persons — of all Democrats who are 
desirous of securing the independence of 



the Confederate States with a view of re- 
storing the Union as it was." 

It would be idle to comment on such 
gibberish as the statement that " the inde- 
pendence of the Confederate States" was to 
be used as the means of restoring " the 
Union as it was;" and yet, under the man- 
ipulations of these traitorous jugglers, doubt- 
less the brains of many have been so far 
muddled as to accept this shameless de- 
claration as true. 

But proceeding to the specific purposes of 
the order, which its leaders have had in 
vie^w from the beginning, and which, as 
will be seen, it has been able, in many cases, 
to carry out with very considerable success, 
the following are found to be the most 
pointedly presented by the testimony : 

1. Aiding Soldiers to Desert and Harboring and 
Protecting Deserters. — Early in its history the 
order essayed to undermine such portions 
of the army as were exposed to its in- 
sidious approaches. Agents were sent by 
the Knights of the Golden Circle into the 
camps to introduce the order among the 
soldiers, and those who became members 
were instructed to induce as many of their 
companions as possible to desert, and for 
this purpose the latter were furnished by 
the order with money and citizens' clothing. 
Soldiers who hesitated at desertion, but de- 
sired to leave the army, were introduced 
to lawyers who engaged to furnish them 
some quasi legal pretext for so doing, and a 
certain attorney of Indianapolis, named 
Walpole, who was particularly conspicuous 
in furnishing facilities of this character to 
soldiers who applied to him, has boasted 
that he has thus aided five hundred en- 
listed men to escape from their contracts. 
Through the schemes of the order in In- 
diana whole companies were broken up — 
a large detachment of a battery company, 
for instance, deserting on one occasion to 
the enemy with two of its guns — and the 
camps were imbued with a spirit of discon- 
tent and dissatisfaction with the service. 
Some estimate of the success of these 
efibrts may be derived from a report of the 
Adjutant General of Indiana, of January, 
in 1863, setting forth that the number of 
deserters and absentees returned to the 
army through the post of Indianapolis 
alone, during the month of December, 
1862, was nearly two thousand six hun- 
dred. 

As soon as arrests of these deserters be- 
gan to be generally made, writs of habeas 
corpus were issued in their cases by disloyal 
judges, and a considerable number were dis- 
charged thereon. In one instance in Indi- 
ana, where an officer in charge of a deserter 
properly refused to obey the writ, after it 
had been suspended in such cases by the 
President, his attachment for contempt 
was ordered by the Chief Justice of the 
State, who declared that "the streets ot 



S32 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Indianapolis might run with blood, but that 
he would enforce his authority against the 
President's order." On another occasion 
certain United States officers who had 
made the arrest of deserters in Illinois 
were themselves arrested for kidnapping, 
and held to trial by a disloyal judge, wlio 
at the same time discharged the deserters, 
though acknowledging them to be such. 

Soldiers upon deserting, were assured of 
immunity from punishment and protection 
on the part of the order, and were instruc- 
ted to bring away with them their arms, 
and, if mounted, their horses. Details sent 
to arrest them by the military authorities, 
were in several cases forcibly resisted, and, 
where not unusually strong in numbers, 
were driven back by large bodies of men, 
subsequently generally ascertained to be 
members of the order. Where arrests 
were effected, our troops were openly at- 
tacked and fired upon on their return. 
Instances of such attacks occurring in Mor- 
gan and Rush counties, Indiana, are espe- 
cially noticed by General Carrington. In 
the case of the outbreak in Morgan county, 
J. S. Bingham, editor of tlie Indianapolis 
Sentinel, a member or friend of the order, 
sought to forward to the disloyal newspa- 
pers of the West false and inflammatory 
telegraphic dispatclies in regard to the 
afltair, to the efiect that cavalry had been 
sent to arrest all the Democrats in the 
county, that they had committed gross 
outrages, axid that several citizens had 
been shot; and adding "ten thousand sol- 
diers can not hold the men arrested this 
night. Civil war and bloodshed are inev- 
itable." The assertions in this dispatch 
Avere entirely false, and may serve to illus- 
trate the fact heretofore noted, that a stu- 
dious misrepresentation of the acts of the 
Government and its officers is a part of the 
prescribed duty of tiie members of tlie 
order. It is projjer to mention that seven 
of the party in Morgan county, wlio made 
the attack upon our troops, were convicted 
of their ofiense bj' a State court. Upon 
their trial it was proved that the party was 
com])osed of members of the Knights of 
the Golden Circle. 

One of the most pointed instances of pro- 
tection afl"orded to deserters occurred in a 
case in Indiana, wliere seventeen intrenched 
themselves in a log cabin with a ditch and 
palisade, and were furnished with jjrovisions 
and sustained in their defense against our 
military autliorities for a considerable pe- 
riod by the order or its friends. 

2. Discovraging Enlistments and Resisting the 
Draft. — It is especially inculcated by the 
oi'der to oppose the re-eiiforcement of our 
armies, either by volunteers or draited men. 
In 1862 the Knights of the Golden Circle 
organized generally to resist the draft in the 
Western States, and were strong enough in 
certain localities to greatly embarrass the 



Government. In this year and early in 
1S63 a number of enrolhng officers were 
shot in Indiana and Illinois. In Blackford 
county, Indiana, an attack was made upon 
the court-house, and the books connected 
with the draft were destroyed. In several 
counties of the State a considerable mili- 
tary force was required for the protection 
of the United States officials, and a large 
number of arrests were made, including 
that of one Reynolds, an ex-Senator of the 
Legislature, for publicly urging upon the 
populace to resist the conscription — an of- 
fense of the same character, in fact, as that 
upon which Vallandigham was apprehended 
in Ohio. These ovitbreaks were no doubt, 
in most cases, incited by the order and en- 
gaged in by its members. In Indiana 
nearly two hundred persons were indicted 
for conspiracy against the Government, re- 
sisting the draft, etc., and about sixty of 
these were convicted. 

Where members of the order were forced 
into the army by the draft, they were in- 
structed, in case they were prevented fi'om 
presently escaping, and were obliged to go 
to the field, to use their arms against their 
fellow-soldiers rather than the enemy, or, if 
possible, to desert to the enemy, by whom, 
through the signs of the order, they would 
be recognized and received as friends. 
AVhenever a member volunteered in the 
army he was at once exj^elled from the 
order. 

3. Circulation of Disloyal and Treasonable 
Fvblications. — The order, especially in Mis- 
souri, has secretly circulated througiiout the 
country a great quantity of treasonable 
publications, as a means of extending its 
own power and influence, as well as of giv- 
ing encouragement to the disloyal and in- 
citing them to treason. Of these, some of 
the principal are the following: Pollard's 
Southern History of the War, Oj/icial jReports of 
the Confederate Government, Life of Stoneu-all 
Jackson, pamphlets containing articles from 
the Metropolitan liecord, Abraham Africanus, or 
Mysteries of the White House, The Lincoln Cat- 
echism, or a Chdde to the Presidential Election of 
1864, Indestructible Organics, by Tirga. These 
publications have generally been procured 
by i'ormal requisitions drawn upon the 
grand commander by leading members in 
the interior of a State. One of these re- 
quisitions, dated June 10th last, and drawn 
by a local secretary of the order at Gentry- 
ville, Missouri, is exhibited in the testi- 
mony. It contains a column of the initials 
of subscribers, opposite whose names are 
entered the number of disloyal publications 
to be i'urnished, the particular book or 
books, etc., required being indicated by. 
iictitious titles. 

4. Commurdcatingwith, and Giving Ldelligence 
to, the Enemy. — Smith, Grand Secretary of 
the order in Missouri, says, in his confes- 
sion : " Rebel spies, mail-carriers, and ends- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



333 



saries have been carefully protected by this 
order ever since I have been a member." 
It is shown in the testimony to be custo- 
mary in the rebel service to employ mem- 
bers of the order as spies, under the guise 
of soldiers furnished with furloughs to visit 
their homes within our lines. Un coming 
within the territory occupied by. our forces, 
they are harbored and supplied with infor- 
mation by the order. Another class of spies 
claim to be deserters from the enemy, and 
at once seek an opportunity to take the 
oath of allegiance, which, however, though 
voluntarily taken, they claim to be admin- 
istered while they are under a species of 
duress, and, therefore, not to be binding. 
Upon swearing allegiance to the Govern- 
ment, the pretended deserter engages, with 
the assistance of the order, in collecting 
contraband goods or procuring intelligence 
to be conveyed to the enemy, or in some 
other treasonable enterprise. In his official 
report of June 12th last, Colonel Sanderson 
remarks: "This department is filled with 
rebel spies, all of whom belong to the 
order." 

In Missouri regular mail communication 
was for a long period maintained through 
the agency of the order from St. Louis to 
Price's army, by means of which private 
letters, as well as official dispatches between 
him and the Grand Commander of Missouri, 
were regularly transmitted. The mail- 
carriers started from a point on the Pacific 
railroad, near Kirkwood station, about four- 
teen miles from St. Louis, and, traveling 
only by night, proceeded (to quote from 
Colonel Sanderson's report) to " Mattox 
Mills, on the Maramee river, thence past 
Mineral Point to Webster, thence to a point 
fifteen miles below Van Buren, where they 
crossed the Black river, and thence to the 
rebel lines." It is, probably, also by this 
route that the secret correspondence, stated 
by the witness Pitman to ha,ve been con- 
stantly kept up between Price and Vallan- 
digham, the heads of the order at the 
North and South, respectively, was success- 
fully maintained. 

A similar communication has been con- 
tinuously held with the enemy from Louis- 
ville, Kentucky. A considerable number 
of women in that State, many of them of 
high position in rebel society, and some of 
them outwardly professing to be loyal, were 
discovered to have been actively engaged in 
receiving and forwarding mails, with the as- 
sistance of the order and as its instruments. 
Two of the most notorious and successful 
of these, Mrs. Woods and Miss Cassell, have 
been apprehended and imprisoned. 

By means of this correspondence with 
the enemy, the members of the order were 
promptly apprised of all raids to be made 
by the forces of the former, and were able 
to hold themselves prepared to render aid 
and comfort to the raiders. To show how 



efiicient for this purpose was the system 
thus established, it is to be added that our 
military authorities have, in a number of 
cases, been informed, through membene of 
the order employed in the interest of the 
Government, of impending raids and im- 
portant army movements of the rebels, not 
only days, but sometimes weeks, sooner 
than the same intelligence could have 
reached them through the ordinary chan- 
nels. 

On the other hand, the system of espion- 
age kept up by the order, for the purpose of 
obtaining information of the movements of 
our own forces, etc., to be imparted to the 
enemy, seems to have been as perfect as it 
was secret. The Grand Secretary of the 
order in Missouri states, in his confession : 
"One of the especial objects of this order 
was to place members in steamboats, ferry- 
boats, telegraph offices, express offices, de- 
partment headquarters, provost marshal's 
office, and, in fact, in every position where 
they' could do valuable service;" and he 
proceeds to specify certain members who, 
at the date of his confession, (August 2d 
last,) were employed at the express and 
telegraph offices in St. Louis. 

5. Aiding the Enemy^ by Recruiting far them, or 
as^sting them to Recruit^ within our lines. — This 
has also been extensively carried on by 
members of the order, particularly in Ken- 
tucky and Missouri. It is estimated that 
two thousand men were sent South from 
Louisville alone during a few weeks in 
April and May, 1864. The order and its 
friends at that city have a permanent fund, 
to which there are many subscribers, for the 
purpose of fitting out with pistols, clotiiing, 
money, etc., men desiring to join the South- 
ern service ; and, in the lodges of the order 
in St. Louis and Northern Missouri, money 
has often been raised to'purchase horses, 
arms, and equipments for soldiers about to 
be forwarded to the Southern army. In 
the latter State, parties empmvered by 
Price, or by Grand Commander Hunt as 
his representative, to recruit for the rebel 
service, were nominally authorized to ^'^ locate 
lands," as it was expressed, and in their re- 
ports, which were formally made, the num- 
ber of acres, etc., located represented the 
number of men recruited. At Louisville, 
those desiring to join the Southern forces 
were kept hidden, and supplied with food 
and lodging until a convenient occasion was 
presented for their transportation South. 
They were then collected, and conducted at 
night to a safe rendezvous of the order, 
whence they were forwarded to their desti- 
nation, in some cases stealing horses from 
the United States corrals on their way. 
While awaiting an occasion to be sent 
South, the men, to avoid the suspicion 
which might be excited by their being seen 
together in any considerable number, were 
often employed on farms in the vicinity of 



334 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



Louisville, and the farm of one Grant in 
that neighborhood, (at whose house, also, 
meetings of the order were held,) is indi- 
cated in the testimony as one of tlie locali- 
ties where such recruits were rendezvoused 
/ and employed. 

The same facilities which were aflforded 
to recruits for the Southern army were also 
furnished by the order to persons desiring 
to pi'oceed beyond our lines for any illegal 
purpose. By these Louisville was generally 
preferred as a point of departure, and, on 
the Mississippi river, a particular steamer, 
the Graham, was selected as the safest con- 
veyance. 

6. Furnishing the rebels with Arms, Ammuni- 
tion, etc. — In this, too, the order, and espe- 
cially its female members and allies, has 
been sedulously engaged. The rebel wo- 
men of Louisville and Kentucky are repre- 
sented as having rendered the most valuable 
aid to the Southern army, by transporting 
large quantities of percussion caps, powder, 
etc., concealed upon their persons, to some 
convenient locality near the lines, whence 
they could be readily conveyed to those for 
whom they were intended. It is estimated 
that at Louisville, up to May 1st last, the 
&um of $17,000 had been invested by the 
order in ammunition and arms, to be for- 
warded principally in this manner to the 
rebels. In St. Louis several firms, who are 
well known to the Government, the princi- 
pal of which is Beauvais & Co., have been 
engaged in supplying arms and ammunition 
to members of the order, to be conveyed to 
their Southern allies. Mary Ann Pitman, a 
reliable witness, and a member of the Order 
of American Knights, who will hereafter be 
specially alluded to, states in her testimony 
that she visited Beauvais & Co. three times, 
and procured from them on each occasion 
about $80 worth of caps, besides a number 
of pistols and cartridges, which ghe carried 
in person to Forrest's command, as well as 
a much larger quantity of similar articles 
which she caused to be forwarded by other 
agents. The guerrillas in Missouri also re- 
ceive arms from St. Louis, and one Douglas, 
one of the most active conspirators of the 
Order of American Knights in Missouri, 
and a special emissary of Price, was arrested 
while in the act of transporting a box of 
forty revolvers by railroad to a guerrilla 
camp in the interior of the State. Medical 
stores in large quantities were likewise, by 
the aid of the order, furnished to the en- 
emy, and a " young doctor " named Moore, 
said to be now a medical inspector in the 
rebel army, is mentioned as having " made 
$75,000 by smuggling medicines" — princi- 
pally from Louisville — through the lines of 
our army. Supplies were, in some cases, 
conveyed to the enemy through the me- 
dium of professed loyalists, who, having re- 
ceived permits for that purpose from the 
United States military authorities, would 



forward their goods as if for ordinary pur- 
poses of trade, to a certain poirwt near the 
rebel lines, where, by the connivance of the 
owners, the enemy would be enabled to 
seize them. 

7. Co-operating with the Enemy in Raids and 
Jnvasions. — While it is clear that the order 
has given aid, both directly and indirectly, 
to the forces of the rebels, and to guerrilla 
bands, when engaged in making incursions 
into the border States, yet because, on the 
one hand, of the constant restraint upon 
its action exercised by our military author- 
ities, and, on the other, of the general suc- 
cess of our armies in the field over those of 
the enemy, their allies at the North have 
never thus far been able to carry out their 
grand plan of a general armed rising of the 
order, and its co-operation on an extended 
scale with the Southern forces. This plan 
has been twofold, and consisted, first, of a 
rising of the order in Missouri, aided by a 
strong detachment from Illinois, and a co- 
operation with a rebel army under Price; 
second, of a similar rising in Indiana, Ohio, 
and Kentucky, and a co-operation with a 
force under Breckinridge, Buckner, Morgan, 
or some other rebel commander, who was* 
to invade the latter State. In this case the 
order was first to cut the railroads and tele- 
graph wires, so that intelligence of the 
movement might not be sent abroad and 
the transportation of Federal troops might 
be delayed, and then to seize upon the ar- 
senals at Indianapolis, Columbus, Springfield, 
Louisville, and Frankfort, and, furnishing 
such of their number as were without arms, 
to kill or make prisoners of department, 
district, and post commanders, release the 
rebel prisoners at Eock Island, and at 
Camps Morton, Douglas, and Chase, and 
thereupon join the Southern army at Louis- 
ville or some other point in Kentucky, 
which State was to be permanently occu- 
pied by the combined force. At the period 
of the movement it was also proposed that 
an attack should be made upon Chicago by 
means of steam-tugs mounted with cannon. 
A similar course was to be taken in Mis- 
souri, and was to result in the permanent 
occupation of that State. 

This scheme has long occupied the minds 
of members of the order, and has been con- 
tinually discussed by them in their lodges. 
A rising, somewhat of the character de- 
scribed, was intended to have taken place 
in the spring of this year, simultaneously 
with an expected advance of the army of 
Lee upon Washington ; but the plans of the 
enemy having been anticipated by the move- 
ments of our own generals, the rising of the 
conspirators was necessarily postponed. 
Again, a general movement of the Southern 
forces was expected to occur about July 4, 
and with this the order was to co-operate. 
A speech to be made by Vallandigham at 
the Chicago Convention was, it is said, to be 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



535 



the signal for the rising ; but the postpone- 
ment of the convention, as well as the fail- 
ure of the rebel armies to engage in the an 
ticipated movement, again operated to dis- 
turb the programme of the order. During 
the summer, however, the grand plan of ac- 
tion above set forth has been more than 
ever discussed throughout the order, and 
its success most confidently predicted, while, 
at the same time, an extensive organization 
and preparation for carrying the conspiracy 
into effect have been actively going on. 
But, up to this time, notwithstanding the 
late raids of the enemy in Kentucky, and 
the invasion of Missouri by Price, no such 
general action on the part of the order as 
was contemplated has taken place — a result, 
in great part, owing to the activity of our 
military authorities in strengthening the 
detachments at the prisons, arsenals, etc., 
and in causing the arrest of the leading 
conspirators in the several States, and espe- 
cially in the seizure of large quantities of 
arms which had been shipped for the use of 
the order in their intended outbreak. It 
was doubtless on account of these precau- 
tions that the day last appointed for the 
rising of the order in Indiana and Ken- 
tucky (August 16) passed by with but slight 
disorder. 

It is, however, the inability of the public 
enemy, in the now declining days of the 
rebellion, to initiate the desired mo\«ement 
which has prevented the order from engag- 
ing in open warfare; and it has lately been 
seriously considered in their councils wheth- 
er they should not proceed with their re- 
volt, relying alone upon the guerrilla bands 
of Syphert, Jesse and others, for support 
and assistance. 

With these guerrillas the order has always 
most readily acted along the border, and in 
cases of capture by the Union forces of 
Northern members of the order engaged in 
co-operating with them, the guerrillas have 
frequently retaliated by seizing prominent 
Union citizens and holding them as host- 
ages for the release of their allies. At other 
times our Government has been officially 
notified by the rebel authorities that if the 
members of the order captured were not 
treated by us as ordinary prisoners of war, 
retaliation would be resorted to. 

An atrocious plan of concert between 
members of the order in Indiana and cer- 
tain guerrilla bands of Kentucky, agreed 
upon last spring, may be here remarked 
upon. Some two thousand five hundred or 
three thousand guerrillas were to be thrown 
into the border counties, and were to as- 
sume the character of refugees seeking em- 
ployment Being armed they were secretly 
to destroy Government property wherever 
practicable, and subsequently to control the 
elections by force, prevent enlistments, aid 
deserters, and stir up strife between the 
civil and military authorities. 



A singular feature of the raids of the en- 
emy remains only to be adverted to, viz. : 
that the officers conducting these raids are 
furnished by the rebel Government with 
quantities of United States Treasury notes 
for use within our lines, and that these are 
probably most frequently procured through 
the agency of members of the order. 

Mary Ann Pitman states that Fori-est, of 
the rebel army, at one time exhibited to 
her a letter to himself from a prominent 
rebel sympathizer and member of the order 
in Washington, D. C, in which it was set 
forth that the sum of $20,000 in "green- 
backs" had actually been forwarded by him 
to the rebel Government at Richmond. 

8. Destruction of Government Property. — 
There is no doubt that large quantities of 
Government property have been burned or 
otherwise destroyed by the agency of the 
order in diflFerent localities. At Louisville, 
in the case of the steamer Taylor, and on 
the Mississippi river, steamers belonging to 
the United States have been burned at the 
wharves, and generally when loaded with 
Government stores. Shortly before the ar- 
rest of Bowles, the senior of the major gen- 
erals of the order in Indiana, he had been 
engaged in the preparation of "Greek 
Fire," which, it was supposed, would be 
found serviceable in the destruction of pub- 
lic property. It was generally understood 
in the councils of the order in the State of 
Kentucky that they were to be compen- 
sated for such destruction by the rebel Gov- 
ernment, by receiving a commission of ten 
per cent, of the value of the property so 
destroyed, and that this value was to be de- 
rived from the estimate of the loss made in 
each case by Northern newspapers. 

9. Destruction of Private Property and Perse- 
cution of Loyal Men. — It is reported by Gen- 
eral Carrington that the full development 
of the order in Indiana was followed by " a 
state of terrorism " among the Union resi- 
dents of "portions of Brown, Morgan, 
Johnson, Rush, Clay, Sullivan, Bartholo- 
m-ew, Hendricks, and other counties " in 
that State ; that from some localities indi- 
viduals were driven away altogether ; that 
in others their barns, hay and wheat-racks 
were burned; and that many persons, 
under the general insecurity of life and 
property, sold their effects at a sacrifice 
and removed to other places. At one time 
in Brown county, the members of the order 
openly threatened the lives of all "Aboli- 
tionists" who refused to sign a peace me- 
morial which they had prepared and ad- 
dressed to Congress. In Missouri, also, 
similar outrages committed upon the prop- 
erty of loyal citizens are attributable in a 
great degree to the secret order. 

Here the outbreak of the miners in the 
coal disti'icts of Eastern Pennsylvania, in 
the autumn of last year, may be appropri- 
ately referred to. It was fully shown in the 



336 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



testimony adduced, upon the trials of these 
insurgents, who were guilty of the destruc- 
tion of property and numerous acts of vio- 
lence, as well as murder, that they were 
generally members of a secret treasonable 
association, similar in all respects to the 
Knights of the Golden Circle, at the meet> 
ings of which they had been incited to the 
commission of the crimes for which they 
were tried and convicted. 

10. Assassination ajid Murder. — After what 
has been disclosed in regard to this infa- 
mous league of traitors and ruffians, it will 
not be a matter of surprise to learn that 
the cold-blooded assassination of Union cit^ 
izens and soldiers has been included in their 
devilish scheme of operations. Green B. 
Smith states in his confession that " the se- 
cret assassination of United States officers, 
soldiers, and Government employes, has 
been discussed in the councils of the order 
and recommended." It is also shown in 
the course of the testimony that at a large 
•meeting of the order in St. Louis, in May 
or June last, it was proposed to form a 
secret police of members for the purpose of 
patrolling the streets of that city at night 
and killing every detective and soldier that 
could be readily disposed of; that this prop- 
osition was coolly considered, and finallj' 
rejected, not because of its fiendish charac- 
ter — no voice being raised against its crim- 
inality — but because only it was deemed 
premature. At Louisville, in June last, a 
similar scheme was discussed among the 
order for the waylaying and butchering of 
negro soldiers in the streets at night; and 
in the same month a party of its members 
in that city was actually organized for the 
purpose of throwing off the track of the 
Nashville railroad a train of colored troops 
and seizing the opportunity to take the 
lives of as many as possible. Again, in 
July, the assassination of an obnoxious pro- 
vost marshal, by betraying him into the 
hands of guerrillas, was designed by mem- 
bers in the interior of Kentucky. Further, 
at a meeting of the Grand Council of Indiana 
at Indianapolis on June 14th last, the mur- 
der of one Coffin, a Government detective, 
who, as it was supposed, had betrayed the 
order, was deliberately discussed and unani- 
mously determined upon. This fact is stated 
by Stidger in his report to General Carring- 
ton of June 17th last, and is more fully set 
forth in his testimony upon the trial of 
Dodd. He deposes that at the meeting in 
question, Dodd himself volunteered to go 
to Hamilton, Ohio, where Coffin was ex- 
pected to be found, and there "dispose of 
the latter." He adds that prior to the 
meeting, he himself conveyed from Judge 
Bullitt, at Louisville, to Bowles and Dodd, 
at Indianapolis, special instructions to have 
Coffin " put out of the way" — " murdered" — 
" at all hazards." 

The opinion is expressed by Colonel San- 



derson, under date of June 12th last, that 
"the recent numerous cold-blooded assas- 
sinations of military officers and uncondi- 
tional Union men throughout the military 
district of North Missouri, especially along 
the western border," is to be ascribed to 
the agency of the order. The witness Pit- 
man represents that it is "a part of the 
obligation or understanding of the order " 
to kill officers and soldiers " whenever it can 
be done by steahh" as well as loyal citizens 
when considered important or influential 
persons ; and she adds, that while at Mem- 
phis, duiung the past summer, she kneiv that 
men on picket were secretly killed by 
members of the order approaching them in 
disguise. 

In this connection may be recalled the 
wholesale assassination of Union soldiers 
by members of the order and their confed- 
erates at Charleston, Illinois, in March last, 
in regard to which, as a startling episode of 
the rebellion, a full report was addressed 
from this office to the President, under date 
of July 26th last. This concerted murder- 
ous assault upon a scattered body of men, 
mostly unarmed — apparently designed for 
the mere purpose of destroying as many lives 
of Union soldiers as possible — is a forcible 
illustration of the utter malignity and de- 
pravity which characterize the members of 
this order in their zeal to commend them- 
selves as allies to their fellow-conspirators 
at the South. 

11. Establishment of a North-western Confeder- 
acy. — In concluding this review of some of 
the principal specific purposes of the order, 
it remains only to remark upon a further 
design of many of its leading members, the 
accomplishment of which they are repre- 
sented as having deeply at heart. Hating 
New England, and jealous of her influence 
and resources, and claiming that the inter- 
ests of the West and South, naturally con- 
nected as they are through the Mississippi 
valley, are identical, and actuated further 
by an intensely revolutionary spirit as well 
as an unbridled and unprincipled ambition, 
these men have made the establishment of 
a Western or North-western Confederacy, 
in alliance with the South, the grand aim 
and end of all their plotting and conspir- 
ing. It is with this steadily in prospect 
that they are constantly seeking to produce 
discontent, disorganization, and civil dis- 
order at the North. With this in view, 
they gloat over every reverse of the armies 
of the Union, and desire that the rebellion 
shall be protracted until the resources of 
the Government shall be exhausted, its 
strength paralyzed, its currency hopelessly 
depreciated, and confidence every-whero 
destroyed. Then, from the anarchy which, 
under their scheme, is to ensue, the new 
Confederacy is to arise, which is either to 
unite itself with that of the South, or to 
form therewith a close and permanent alii- 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



337 



ance. Futile and extravagant as this 
scheme may appear, it is yet the settled 
purpose of many leading spirits of the se 
cret conspiracy, and is their favorite subject 
of thought and discussion. N ot only is this 
scheme deliberated upon in the lodges of 
the order, but it is openly proclaimed. 
Members of the Indiana Legislature, even, 
have publicly announced it, and avowed 
that they vrill take their own State out of 
the Union, and recognize the independence 
of the South. A citizen captured by a 
guerrila band in Kentucky last summer, 
records the fact that the establishment of a 
new confederacy as the deliberate purpose 
of the Western people was boastfully as- 
serted by these outlaws, who also assured 
their prisoner that in the event of such es- 
tablishment there would be "a greater 
rebellion than ever ! " 

Lastly, it is claimed that the new confed- 
eracy is already organized ; that it has a 
" provisional government," officers, depart- 
ments, bureaus, etc., in secret operation. 
No comment is necessary to be made upon 
this treason, not now contemplated for the 
first time in our history. Suggested by the 
present rebellion, it is the logical conse- 
quence of the ardent and utter sympathy 
therewith which is the life and inspiration 
of the secret order. 

VIII. THE WITNESSES AND THEIR TESTIMONY. 

The facts detailed in the present report 
have been derived from a great variety of 
dissimilar sources, but all the witnesses, 
however different their situations, concur 
so pointedly in their testimony, that the 
evidence which has thus been furnished 
must be accepted as of an entirely satisfac- 
tory character. 

The principal witnesses may be classified 
as follows : 

1. Shrewd, intelligent men, employed as 
detectives, and with a peculiar talent for 
their calling, who have gradually gained 
the confidence of leading members of the 
order, and in some cases have been admit- 
ted to its temples and been initiated into 
one or more of the degrees. The most re- 
markable of these is Stidger, formerly a 
private soldier in our army, who, by the 
use of an uncommon address, though at 
great personal risk, succeeded in establish- 
ing such intimate relations with Bowles, 
Bullitt, Dodd, and other leaders of the or- 
der in Indiana and Kentucky, as to be 
appointed Grand Secretary for the latter 
State, a position the most favorable for ob- 
taining information of the plans of these 
traitors and warning the Government of 
their intentions. It is to the rare fidelity 
of this man, who has also been the princi- 
pal witness upon the trial of Dodd, that the! 
Government has been chiefly indebted fori 
the expo.sure of the designs of the conspir- 
ators in the two States named. I 
22 



2. Rebel officers and soldiers voluntarily 
or involuntarily making disclosures to our 
military authorities. The most valuable 
witnesses of this class are pri.soners of war, 
who, actuated by laudable motives, have 
of their own accord furnished a large 
amount of information in regard to the 
order, especially as it exists in the South, 
and of the relations of its members with 
those of the Northern section. Among 
these, also, are soldiers at our prison camps, 
who, withoutdesigningit, havemadeknown 
to our officials, by the use of the signs, 
etc., of the order, that they were members. 

3. Scouts employed to travel through the 
interior of the border States, and also 
within or in the neighborhood of the en- 
emy's lines. The fact that some of these 
were left entirely ignorant of the existence 
of the order, upon being so employed, at- 
taches an increased value to their discove- 
ries in regard to its operations. 

4. Citizen prisoners, to whom, while in 
confinement, disclosures were made rela- 
tive to the existence, extent, and character 
of the order by fellow-prisoners who were 
leading members, and who, in some instan- 
ces, upon becoming intimate with the wit- 
ness, initiated him into one of the degrees. 

5. Members of the order, who, upon a 
full acquaintance with its principles, have 
been appalled by its infamous designs, and 
have voluntarily abandoned it, freely mak- 
ing known their experience to our military 
authorities. In this class may be placed 
the female witness, Mary Ann Pitman, 
who, though in arrest at the period of her 
disclosures, was yet induced to make them 
for the reason that, as she says, "at the 
last meeting which I attended they passed 
an order which I consider as utterly atro- 
cious and barbarous; so I told them I 
would have nothing more to do with 
them." This woman was attached to the 
command of the rebel Forrest, as an officer 
under the name of " Lieutenant Rawley;" 
but, because her sex afforded her unusual fa- 
cilities for crossing our lines, she was often 
employed in the execution of important 
commissions within our territory, and, as a 
member of the order, was made extensively 
acquainted with other members, both of 
the Northern and Southern sections. Her 
testimony is thus peculiarly valuable, and, 
being a person of unusual intelligence and 
force of character, her statements are suc- 
cinct, pointed, and emphatic. They are 
also especially useful as fully corroborating 
those of other witnesses regarded as most 
trustworthy. 

6. Officers of the order of high rank, who 
have been prompted to present confessions, 
more or less detailed, in regard to the or- 
der and their connection with it. The 
principals of these are, Hunt, Dunn, and 
Smith, Grand Commander, Deputy Grand 
Commander, and (irand Secretary of the 



338 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



order in Missouri, to whose statements fre- 
quent reference has been made. These 
confessions, though in some degree guarded 
and disingenuous, have furnished to the 
Government mucli important information 
as to the operations of the order, esjiecially 
in Missouri, the affiliation of its leaders 
with Price, etc. It is to be noted that 
Dunn makes the statement in common 
with other witnesses that, in entering the 
order, he was quite ignorant of its ultimate 
purposes. He says: "I did not become a 
member understandingly ; the initiatory 
step was taken in the dark, without reflec- 
tion and without knowledge." 

7. Deserters from our army, who, upon 
being apprehended, confessed that they 
had been induced and assisted to desert by 
members of the order. It was, indeed, 
principally from these confessions that the 
existence of the secret treasonable organiza- 
tion of the Knights of the Golden Circle 
was first discovered in Indiana in the year 
1862. 

8. Writers of anonymous communica- 
tions, addressed to heads of departments 
or provost marshals, disclosing facts corrobo- 
rative of other more important statements. 

9. The witnesses before the grand jury 
at Indianapolis, in 1863, when the order 
was formally presented as a treasonable or- 
ganization, and those whose testimony has 
been recently introduced upon the trial of 
Dodd. 

It need only be added that a most satis- 
factory test of the credibility and weight of 
much of the evidence which has been fur- 
nished is afforded by the printed testimony 
in regard to the character and intention of 
the order, which is found in its National and 
State constitutions and its ritual. Indeed, 
the statements of the various witnesses 
are but presentations of the logical and in- 
evitable consequences and results of the 
principles therein set forth. 

In concluding this review, it remains only 
to state that a constant reference has been 
made to the elaborate official reports, in 
regard to the order, of Brigadier General 
Garrington, commanding District of Indi- 
ana, and of Colonel Sanderson, Provost 
Marshal General of the Department of 
Missouri. The great mass of the testimony 
upon the subject of this conspiracy has 
been furnished by these officers ; the latter 
acting under the orders of Major General 
Rosecrans, and the former co-operating, 
under the instructions of the Secretary of 
War, with Major (Jeneral Burbridge, com- 
manding District of Kentucky, as well as 
with Governor Morton, of Indiana, who, 
though at one time greatly embarrassed, 
by a Legislature strongly tainted with dis- 
loyalty, in his efforts to repress this domes- 
tic enemy, has at last seen his State relieved 
from the danger of a civil war. 



But, although the treason of the order 
has been thoroughly exposed, and although 
its capacity for fatal mischief has, by means 
of the arrest of its leaders, the seizure 
of its arms, and the other vigorous means 
which have been pursued, been seriously 
impaired, it is still busied with its plottings 
against the Government, and with its per- 
fidious designs in aid of the Southern re- 
bellion. It is reported to have recently 
adopted new signs and passwords, and its 
members assert that foul means will be 
used to prevent the success of the Admin- 
istration at the coming election, and threat- 
en an extended revolt in the event of the 
re-election of President Lincoln. 

In the presence of the rebellion and of 
this secret order — which is but its echo and 
faithful ally — we can not but be amazed at 
the utter and wide.spread profligacy, per- 
sonal and political, which these move- 
ments against the Government disclose. 
The guilty men engaged in them, after 
casting aside their allegiance, seem to have 
trodden under foot every sentiment of 
honor and every restraint of law, human 
and divine. Judea produced but one 
Judas Iscariot, and Rome, from the sinks 
of her demoralization, produced but one 
Catiline ; and yet, as events prove, there 
has arisen together in our land an entire 
brood of such traitors, all animated by the 
same parricidal spirit, and all struggling with 
the same relentless malignity for the dis- 
memberment of our Union. Of this ex- 
traordinary phenomenon — not paralleled, 
it is believed, in the world's history — there 
can be but one explanation, and all these 
blackened and fetid streams of crime may 
well be traced to the same common foun- 
tain. So fiercely intolerant and imperious 
was the temper engendered by slavery, 
that when the Southern people, after hav- 
ing controlled the national councils for 
half a century, were beaten at an election, 
their leaders turned upon the Government 
with the insolent fury with which they 
would have drawn their revolvers on a rebel- 
lious slave in one of their negro quarters ; 
and they have continued since to prosecute 
their warfare, amid all the barbarisms and 
atrocities naturally and necessarily inspired 
by the infernal institution in whose inter- 
ests they are sacrificing alike themselves and 
their country. Many of these conspirators, 
as is well known, were fed, clothed, and 
educated at the expense of the nation, and 
were loaded with its honors at the very mo- 
ment they struck at its life with the horri- 
ble criminality of a son stabbing the bosom 
of his own mother while impressing kisses 
on his cheeks. The leaders of the trait- 
ors in the loyal States, who so completely 
fraternize with these conspirators, and 
who.se machinations are now unmasked, 
it is as clearly the duty of the Admin- 
istration to prosecute and punish as it 



TREASON TRIALS AT INDIANAPOLIS. 



339 



is its duty to subjugate the rebels who are 
openly in arms against the Government. 
In the performance of this duty, it is enti- 
tled to expect, and will doubtless receive, 
the zealous co-operation of true men every- 
where, who, in crushing the truculent foe 



ambushed in the haunts of this secret or- 
der, should rival in courage and faithful- 
ness the soldiers who are so nobly sustain- 
ing our flag on the battle-fields of tlie 
South. Respectfully submitted, 

J. HOLT, Judge Advocate General. 



The history of the exposure of the North- 
western Conspiracy would be incomplete with- 
out the insertion of the following letter: 

Headquarters Northern Depart.mknt, ) 
Columbus, Ohio, October 1, 1864. | 
Major' General Halleck, Chief of Staff, Washing- 
ton, D. C: 

General: Soon after my arrival here, to 
take command of this Department, I was in- 
formed, from the War Department, of secret 
organizations then foi-ming in some of the 
States of my command, and instructions to 
try and ferret them out. I placed the papers 
in the hands of Brigadier-General H. B. Car- 
rington, stationed at Indianapolis, Indiana, 
through whom I have been enabled to keep 
the War Department fully informed of the 



meastires being taken by the disloyal. Through 
his energy, perseverance and good judgment, 
I am indebted for all the information I liave 
been able to transmit. Through the informa- 
tion thus obtained, and the measures taken in 
consequence thereof, we are indebted, mainly, 
to being saved from the horrors of civil war 
in these States. 

I can not be relieved from the duties of this 
Department, without putting on record my 
testimony in General Carrington's favor. 
I have the honor to be. General, 
Very respectfully, 

Your obedient servant, 

S. P. HEINTZELMAN, 

Major-General. 
C. H. Potter, Assistant Adjutant-General. 



REPLY OF H. H. DODD. 



Windsor, C. W., November 23, 1864. 
Editors of the Cincinnati Enquirer: 

Gentlemen : In your issue of yesterday, in 
an editorial article, I notice the following 
language : 

'' By the way, it would be instructive to 
learn where the money came from with which 
Mr. Dodd's pistols were purchased; and fur- 
thermore, how Mr. Dodd — crowded as Indiana 
is with spies and secret policemen, every one of 
whom know him, or had his portrait in pos- 
session — contrived to escape to Canada, with 
his pockets full of the effigies of the Presi- 
dent and Secretary of the Treasury." 

The only force and effect of which is to 
convey the idea that I have been acting in the 
interest of the Administration party, and 
have been paid for my services, and allowed 
to escape through their instrumentality. 

This unfounded assault upon my character, 
originated with some irresponsible corre- 
spondent of the Chicago Times, at Indianapo- 
lis, and which has since been made the basis 
of editorial comments, in the Sentinel and En- 
quirer, and thus, intentionally or otherwise, 
you are giving credence and publicity to the 
" complicity with Morton" dodge, gotten up by a 
coterie of " Sons," who have seen fit to take the 
benefit of the " baby act." 

I certainly have no objection to your whip- 
ping your Abolition contemporaries, or to 
your censuring and condemning the men in 
power or their measures; but I must enter my 
solemn protest against the use of my sore 
back as a medium to do the one or the other. 
Neither do I complain of comments upon my 
public or private acts, political principles, 
combinations or associations, as against abo- 
litionisin, terrorism, despotism, usurpation, 
oppression and military dictation; nor upon 
any sins of commission or omission in this 
direction. I am ready to hear " charges and 
specifications," of attempted assassinations, 
of estimates upon my ability, intentions or 
purposes, and this sort of thing; make me out 
an enemy to society from either weakness or 
ambition ; call me a revolutionist, or what 
not, I am willing to leave to time to prove that 
" The ivorst enemy to the peace of man hi ml is he 
who renders a revolution necessary." 

But to charge me with being a " spy and in- 
former," that I would become a decoy to lure 
unsuspecting associates into the boiling caul- 
dron of "crime, hatred and malice," all for 
the "efligies of the President and Secretary 
of the Treasury," is to charge me with a 
lioinous crijiie against mankind, that 1 can 
not permit to be liiiil at my door — and I may 
not remain silent, when the editor of the En- 
quirer, from personal knowledge, knows me 
incapable of playing such a role. 

l)ii you wish sincerely to know in regard to 
the pistols? Vou will recollect that a gentle- 
man in New York claimed them as his indi- 



vidual property, and by reference to my card, 
published on the 5th day of September last, 
you will find further explanation as to my con- 
nection with the said pistols. It was not then 
considered even a crime by Democratic jour- 
nals, to buy and sell, or to keep and bear 
arms. The amount involved was not so large 
as to raise the inquiry, " Where the money came 
from f " 

My escape was no great exploit; not suffi- 
ciently so, at least, to raise the question of 
'' How it was contrived?^' A little affair of this 
sort could be managed as well as the purchase 
of a few hundred pistols, without the inter- 
vention of the Government or any of its 
agents. You do me great injustice when you 
speak of me as some notorious criminal, per- 
sonally known to all thief-catchers, and whose 
picture every detective in the country carried 
about with him. The fact that I have safely 
arrived in a country where the " majesty of the 
law" is respected, fully proves the contrary ; for 
how could I pass through a perfect forest of 
detectives, secret policemen, spies, soldiers in 
uniform, soldiers in citizens' dress — in female 
attire, dressed as hod carriers, as peddlers, 
as white-washers, teamsters, wood-choppers, 
spread all through the county of Marion and 
adjoining counties; swarming in the cities of 
Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Toledo 
and Detroit, and upon every railway train; 
yet simply because I was unknown to them, 
and because they did not have my picture in 
their pockets, I passed through them all un- 
noticed. 

It is no longer necessary to attack my 
honor, to prove the Democratic " leaders" in no 
way connected with the " Dodd conspiracy." 
They are no more responsible for my acts than 
I am for theirs, and I am perfectly willing 
that the acts of some of them, in this case, 
should be the standard if the rest of them 
will assent. 

But the simple object of this note, however, 
was to have you give my denial to the charge 
of " complicity ivith Morton." This is all I ask, 
so that the Democratic masses can see it over 
my own signature. I care not who avers it. 
I am satisfied to risk the question of veracity. 
If you are incredulous, just inquire of Major 
Burnett, General Ilovey or Colonel Warner, 
and niethinks the energetic replies will be 
entirely satisfactory. 

It may be that I committed an error in 
abandoning the " Commission." Be this as it 
may, I regret exceedingly to have made any 
plea either to tlie jurisdiction or to the indict- 
ment, or to have, in any manner, recognized 
the tribunal. 

The charge that I violated a parole is, like 
all the rest, utterly false. I was in solitary 
confinement every moment from the time o£ 
my arrest until the escape. 

Respectfully yours, etc., 

H. H. DODD. 
340 



News Publishing Co. 

Office on Second Floor, one door West of Post-Office, 

SALEJVL, INDIANA. 

PUBLISHERS OF 



^- f(ni^Iil5 * of ♦ iKe ♦ Golden ♦ Circle * 






i3sr book: iFOiiJi^. 



Fancy Job Printing of Every Description. 

BOOKS, PAMPHLETS, 

WEDDING STATIONERY, 

MERCHANTS' STATIONERY, 

PROGRAMMES, Etc, Etc. 



LOWEST POSSIBLE PRICES. 

Estimates Cheerfully Ktarnishied.. 

Correspondence Solicited. 



We keep the Job Department equipped with all modern material 

and machinery, hence our extremely low rates. Large 

orders from all parts of the country are turned 

out daily, giving entire satisfaction. 

Our Motto: "An Extensive Business can afford Less Profits" is Winning. 

ADDRESS ALL ORDERS TO 

News Publishing Company, 

SALEM, INDIANA, 
E. B. STEPHENSON, Jr., Manager. 



/ 



V^^/7? 




m 



-mm 



■iM 



iljf 



'ihiiii 



